So far, I've told you the stuff that everyone now knows. But this Fox News report gets into an area I find hard to believe:
But don’t expect the Obama campaign to forgo the debate - even if McCain does not show up. Said senior strategist Robert Gibbs, “My sense is there’s going to be a stage, an audience, a moderator, and at least one presidential candidate.”If, in a time of crisis, Obama shows up on an empty stage to blather on about himself -- while everyone in America knows that his opponent is trying to fix an emergency situation -- the Lightbringer will cement his rep as an egomaniac.
I hope Obama does this damnfool thing. No matter what he says -- even if he speaks with the tongue of men and of angels -- it'll be a campaign-ending tableau.
20 comments:
Well, it's not like Obama has a choice now. McCain painted him into a really tight corner. If he cancels the debate and returns to D.C. he looks like he's yielding to McCain's leadership. If he shows up for the debate he risks looking like a doofus. My guess is the debate will simply be canceled or rescheduled at the last moment once it becomes clear McCain really is not showing up.
But yes, I do hope Obama will try to debate himself.
Mike J.
But yes, I do hope Obama will try to debate himself.
That would be a snoozer, just one long uhhhhhh.
Joe, this is why I am disappointed in you. McCain is engaging in outright hackery. He is postponing the debate because this economic situation is a direct result of his policies, and he has no response. You used to be a voice of reason, rather than partisan hackery. Please come back. :)
But yes, I do hope Obama will try to debate himself.
That would be a snoozer, just one long uhhhhhh.
Well, they could give him two teleprompters, each one loaded with one of his two opposing positions on each issue, and he could read from them in turn.....
Well, another perspective would be that McCain has painted himself into a corner and now can't win whether he shows up or not.
Because no one in DC is really needing their opinions on this crisis as it would just politicize the process, making it even more partisan instead of less.
But the voters do need their opinions, making the debate even more important.
And given McCain's plan to use the postponement to then postpone the VP debate, it also looks like they're using the whole thing to yet again "protect" her in this weird sexist way from exposing her apparent ignorance.
Plus, McCain dissed Letterman tonight, claiming he was flying to DC to "save the country," but turned out he was still in NYC doing an interview with Katie Couric, which ended up pre-empting the Palin interview, which must not have gone so well (the clips I've seen were pretty bad).
So, I don't know, but I'd say this does not necessarily look so good for McCain here. Looks to me like McCain is the one who's painted himself into a corner with no graceful way out at all. If he doesn't show up, Obama gets to share his views without contest from McCain, and if he does show up it will have to be because he was shamed into it.
Ole Miss and the Debate Commission have announced the debate will go on. We'll see who shows and see how it goes. But I'd be surprised if it leaves McCain in a good light. Already the snap polls show the public wants the debates to go forward. And given the trouncing even the conservatives gave him over the last week, even George Will, I just don't believe this will play well at all.
When the public doesn't buy the story, and even conservatives are starting to gang up on a "conservative" candidate, it just does not bode well.
If conservatives are ganging up on McCain, then I guess that makes Obama the conservative candidate, no? The conservatives have always been unhappy with McCain. Because, I guess, he represents Bush's third term, which is why they hate McCain so much, that must be it...
The debate is on foreign policy, which is on nobody's mind right now. Yeah, I am sure voters want the debates to go forward, but they want the solution to the financial crisis even more.
The bottom line is that there is going to be a bipartisan agreement on the bailout. The stakes are way too high for anything else to happen. Obama will vote for it in the end, and Bush will sign it into law. The difference will be that while Obama is speechifying McCain will be actively working to make it happen.
And then McCain will be able to go on the campaign trail and ask Obama point-blank "what did YOU do while the financial markets were melting down?" Right, promising "change", while McCain was effecting it.
So I guess we'll just have to see how things work out. McCain's instincts have rarely failed him in the past. Obama, on the other hand, does not have any. Once again it's McCain who is acting and Obama who is reacting, just as immediately after the conventions when McCain stole Obama's thunder with Palin's nomination. And now he's about to do it again.
Anon: Fuck you. YOU are the hack. You are mindlessly repeating outright lies that you got from Kos and similar outlets. Do you double check them? No. You simply believe them because they fit into your preconceived script.
"this economic situation is a direct result of his policies"
No, the economic situation is a direct result of the fact that neither the Republican Congress nor the Democratic Congress listened to his warning.
Read this, asshole:
http://cannonfire.blogspot.com/2008/09/mccain-or-obama-who-is-responsible.html
(This is the point where guys like you ALWAYS hold your hands over your ears and go "LA LA LA LA...I CAN'T HEAR YOU!")
"he has no response."
You're talking about Obama there. For days, he had a deer-caught-in the-headlights response, trying to double-talk his way around the fact that he had no idea what to do.
The stupe couldn't even make up his mind as to what he thought of the AIG bailout. He said one thing at one time, then later said something entirely different. And yet brainwashees like you continue to think that he responded decisively!
http://cannonfire.blogspot.com/2008/09/does-team-obama-have-clue-update-is.html
"You used to be a voice of reason, rather than partisan hackery."
Partisan hackery? YOU are accusing ME of that? That's like Hitler accusing the Poles of invading Germany.
I'm a lifelong Dem who reluctantly is supporting the Republican in this election, because I find him the leser of two evils. You may not like that decision -- but how on earth can you call it "partisan"? By what rationale can you justify that adjective?
YOU are the blinkered partisan. You are supporting a candidate that you know damn well has LIED on every major issue.
Think about it. You COULD have tried for the fifty bucks offered in my challenge. You could have listed three issues on which Obama has never lied or switched positions.
But you make no attempt. You know why? Because you cannot come up with three issues. I doubt you could come up with even ONE.
You tell me to "come back." I'm telling you: DON'T come back.
Unless you want to make a try for the fifty. That's the only time I want to hear from fuck-faces like you.
("Cannon is using insulting language!" I can hear some of you saying. So what? Why should Obots be the only people on earth allowed to use insulting language? You GET as you GIVE, and if you don't like insults -- too bad. You should have thought of that earlier.)
But MikeJ, McCain didn't go to DC; he stayed in NYC and did what appears to be a bailout Palin interview with Katie Couric.
How is it Palin represents McCain's "good" instincts when from all appearances she could actually tank his entire campaign. After all, she has yet to give a press conference, which is flatly unprecedented. And weird.
And no, it does not follow that Obama becomes a conservative if conservatives gang up on McCain! Is logic just discouraged or totally banned on this blog?
Civility sure seems to be, and the maestro sets the tone.
Most likely, it will be called off at the last minute.
But if it isn't - he'll seek to exploit the free air time - and most of the media will blather on about how wonderful his comments were (and how McCain chickened out).
One person I heard from today - who isn't terribly political - said 'Well, that shows that McCain can't do two things at once.' My sense is that people are angry and anxious, and they're tending to pin the bad economic news on McCain.
I have the experience of warning people about Obama for a year and a half now - but most people don't see it. I was also predicting that he'd win the Democratic nomination - and most of my friends disagreed - they all thought Hillary would win. That experience has taught me pessimism on this topic.
Eyore
Could Obama be this stupid?
YES HE CAN!
How can the McCain interview preempt the Palin interview? Couldn't they run both of them?
As to Sarah Paling giving a press conference, when will Obama give a presser about his work at the Chicago Annenburg Challenge?
What the hell - I'll take a crack at this. I bet most people don't even try out of cynicism. Did you read about the drafting of the pro-McCain "Letters to the Editor"? The immediate response I heard was: do you think Obama is doing it too? But without further ado, my three responses to:
"You could have listed three issues on which Obama has never lied or switched positions."
1. Education: Reform of "No child left behind."
2. Energy: Ulilize clean coal and nuclear power
3. Social Security - continued opposition to privatization
Have at it, Sir.
I just don't think there's anything that could be a campaign-ender for him at this point. It won't hit the fan until it will be most damaging to the Democratic Party...after he's in the White House.
Regarding the attempt by citizen K,
'Clean coal' is an oxymoron (as anyone speaking honestly would acknowledge). And on this too, Obama has vacillated and tried to have it both ways.
For a start see:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/05/20/obamas_coal_stance_in_kentucky.html
http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2008/03/21/obama-green-coal/
http://www.jetsongreen.com/2007/05/alternative_ene.html
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/1/13/133724/104
http://www.counterpunch.org/frank07312008.html
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0508/Obamas_coal_spot_.html
To a lesser extent, Obama has tried to have it both ways on nuclear power.
And on a related point, he lied regarding 'the only nuclear legislation that I’ve passed.'
see NY Times article (written before the Times simply became an Obama propaganda rag):
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/us/politics/03exelon.html?_r=1
Regarding Social Security privatization - I don't think Obama is a closet proponent of privatization. But he hasn't exactly been a paragon of honesty and unambiguous positions either.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/160179
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2n5OC21RcE
http://mlyon01.wordpress.com/2008/07/27/kinder-gentler-privatization-of-social-security-is-still-privatization/
Good ones about Obama debating himself by saying, "Uhhhh" and repeating his flip-flops. I'd pay to hear that.
My guess is that McCain will propose some legislative work of his own, perhaps using his bill that he introduced (and that died in committee) in May, 2006 as a starting point. I think that Republicans will make sure that anything that McCain comes up with will be included in their proposals and that way the idea that McCain was actually doing something while Obama was talking to himself will get some traction. A hour of Obama talking about foreign policy (during which he will probably offer several reversals from previous statements) will only impress his current supporters. Many more people are concerned about the bailout than are concerned about foreign policy right now.
old dem
As with all of Obama's positions he leaves all doors open or evertyhing on the table. And to really see what the sob wants to do, you have to look behind the scenes and at his advisors. Plus I never trust the guy becasue he flips so much. See link below for some behind the scenes social security possibilities.
http://www.rense.com/general80/d2es.htm
bert in Ohio
citizen k: I suddenly see a problem with my little game.
Hypothetically:
Suppose I were to say, here and now, that you have listed two winning propositions, but that your third idea was off-base. What then?
Someone else can come along and list a third issue.
Hmmm. Not sure what to do in that case. The second person to come along shouldn't win the money, since that person actually solved only one-third of our little puzzle. Doesn't seem fair, does it?
You see the problem, I take it.
So here's what I'm gonna do.
I'm going to hold the contest open until the election. At that time, I'll print any and all entries, and let the readers decide which one was the firstest with the bestest.
If no entry lists three unassailable suggestions -- and if (say) your entry was correct on two points, then yours will be the entry that wins the contest.
As I said, I fully expect to pay the money to SOMEONE.
The point of this exercise is simply to demonstrate how hard it is to come up with three issues.
By the way, could you do me a favor and send your entry to my email? Thanks.
My pet theory of the week is that Obama has the election rigged. Only that could explain his apparent ineptness at the basics of campaigning--such as this latest supergaffe. The man just doesn't seem to care.
This recalls the creepy self-confidence of the neocons in the 2000 and 2004 Presidential races. They knew they didn't have to suck up to the voters, because the votes were being rigged.
Obama and his camp are behaving in much the same way, it seems to me. This suggests they know they can't lose.
An admitted conspiracy theory, offered for its explanatory value.
Ha ha ha, this* is what happens when you don't invite the other presidential candidates to the debate.
Ralph
Joe, I sent the email. btw, do you think it would be equally hard for someone to come up with 3 issues re McCain?
Post a Comment