I agree with Ace of Spades that John McCain should take the gloves off and go after Barack Obama and Democrats in general over the economic crisis and especially Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Democrats, including Obama, played a major role in causing this crisis, and protected the companies involved when all objective experts warned they behaved reckless, and warned they would take the entire economy with them when, not if, they would fall.
However, I think that James Pethokoukos is right when he writes that McCain will not do so.
The incompetent strategists of the McCain campaign have decided that the issue will not help him as much as talking about other subjects would help him. This is nearly unbelievable, but McCain seems to accept their instructions (which indicates he may not be as good a leader as many hope; a good leader listens to advisers but is willing to break with them if his own research taught him they’re wrong).
McCain should take the gloves off, and go after Obama with an anger and aggressiveness seldom seen before. He will have to confront Obama with Democratic policies that proved to be disastrous, and he will have to do so on stage. He should be prepared to do so, and wipe the floor with Obama when the opportunity arrises. If he does not, and I think he won’t, he may just as well suspend his campaign indefinitely.
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
I find this baffling, and infuriating. It almost seems that there must be some other reason that McCain is holding back, though I can’t figure out what it could be. I’m curious about the bill he sponsored regarding the overhaul of the Fannie/Freddie regulatory body- can’t seem to find much information about what happened to it. I believe it was drafted in 2005, then he gave a floor speech in (I think) May ‘06- and then the trail stops cold. Why did it never come to a vote? Was it just a case of the clock running out on the 109th Congress? Was it killed? Not enough support? What? It seems like there might be something there to explain McCain’s reticence (I hope not something that casts him in a bad light, but maybe protecting a friend or political ally?)
I guess Pethokoukos could be right, esp on the concern about being branded a racist (we’ve already seen that accusation made against people like Fox’s Neil Cavuto who dared to mention that it might not have been such a good idea to force banks to make mortgage loans to people who couldn’t afford to pay them back.) And true, too, that most people are so ignorant of economics and finance that the culpability for the meltdown isn’t easily explained.
But at this point, what does McCain have to lose? And to me, it’s not even about winning the WH anymore, it’s about righting the public opinion which has been skewed so far to the Democrats that we’re through the looking glass. The very people who created this mess through bad policy and unscrupulous behavior are being put in front of cameras to scold some of the people who tried to blow the whistle- it’s astounding and profoundly disturbing.
"But at this point, what does McCain have to lose? And to me, it’s not even about winning the WH anymore, it’s about righting the public opinion which has been skewed so far to the Democrats that we’re through the looking glass. The very people who created this mess through bad policy and unscrupulous behavior are being put in front of cameras to scold some of the people who tried to blow the whistle- it’s astounding and profoundly disturbing."
I agree completely with that Christine. This should not be about the white house anymore, it should be about setting something right. The amount of dishonesty, accepted by the fourth estate which should go after politicians who lie, is unbelievable, and indeed ‘profoundly disturbing.’ Something has to give; McCain will have to put it as it is, and if he doesn’t do it, other Republicans should. Where the hell, for instance, is the RNC? I find it utterly unbelievable that they are not fighting back more. Especially considering the fact that the other side is lying. It’s not even about distorting anymore, it’s about downright lying, and they’re getting away with it.
McCain never sponsored the bill, he just hung on as a co-sponsor. Another Republican candidate was the actual sponsor, and he probably was just pandering.
S. 190 [109th]: Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 (GovTrack.us)
Hagel was the sponsor of the bill introduced at the very end of the 109th Congress. It didn’t get out of committee and died in the next Congress.
Pandering to whom, Rudi? No one was paying attention then, so what was the political upside?
And joining a bill as a cosponsor is still sponsoring (I didn’t claim he was an author. And heh- how many of Obama’s bills were actually sponsored by him if you use your definition? He has a reputation for showing up at the last minute.) McCain may have been later to the game than Hagel, Sununu and Dole, but it looks to me from the timing and the speech that he gave on the floor that he saw that the bill was dying and he took to the floor to try to get more people on board.
Thanks for the link though- I was on that website the other day but there was scarcely any information- now I see that people are finally starting to ask questions and the Q&A page has more information (though of course it’s hard to sift through to find what is accurate.) Sounds like the bill made it out of committee but Santorum didn’t bring it up for a vote- but it’s not clear why that was (other priorities, opposition by Bush/Greenspan as to the specifics of the bill, or general opposition which meant that they knew they didn’t have a filibuster proof majority are all being mentioned as potential reasons.)
"It’s not even about distorting anymore, it’s about downright lying, and they’re getting away with it."
Welcome to what left-wingers have been experiencing for about eight years. What the RNC is facing is their own karma – it doesn’t excuse what Obama is doing, but the violin I’m playing is very very small.
utsu, celebrating karma is a bit absurd when you are hurt by it as well. If voters in this country don’t stop buying the partisan fingerpointing (with half the country accepting one party’s spin as truth and the other half seeing it the opposite way) instead of all voters holding ALL elected officials accountable, then we’re the ones who are all going to go down because of it.
I agree completely – I am just saying that an unfair situation should affect both the sides responsible. I was very happy when the NYT ("Obama’s news agency", according to a certain partisan) lambasted Obama for misleading ads, I am very disturbed that Obama can’t trounce McCain on social security the intelligent way but has to lie about McCain’s plan and I am also amused whenever left- or right-wingers try to convince themselves that the media is slanted against them.
I just disagreed with Michael’s notion that the media currently being a slight boon to Obama is business as usual. The media works in unpredictable and irresponsible waves and now McCain is in a random slump, much like where Obama has been.
Well, what I don’t understand is why every valid criticism of the Democrats is answered with a comment about no sympathy for the GOP. No one is asking for that, just for equal scrutiny of the left. Attempting to punish the GOP by voting only for Democrats, no matter how bad they are, is beyond foolish.
The criticism is valid, but it is not to be taken seriously when coming from right-wingers who did not complain about the torrid state of the media and the lack of proper attentiveness from the public in the last eight years. You can’t suddenly be upset about it, when these two factors enabled you to run roughshod and wallow in your ideology at the expense of basically everyone else.
The criticism is valid, but it is not to be taken seriously when coming from right-wingers who did not complain about the torrid state of the media and the lack of proper attentiveness from the public in the last eight years.
A classic example of the ad hominem fallacy. If the criticism is valid, it is valid regardless of WHO offers it. If it stands on its own, it does so however much you wish to demonize the utterer.
That certainly applies both ways, but of late that logical fallacy seems to be the only response some on the left are capable of.
What Tully said, plus it doesn’t even matter if the criticism comes from a conservative who does have a history of applying rational criticisms to the GOP.