I’m sorry Magiver, but you’ve confused me again (and with only two words! I must be easily confused)
I’m under the impression that McCain has 2 jobs at the moment if you will;
Senator
Presidential candidate
As Senator (one of 100), I believe his job would be to debate and vote on a proposal that is created by the appropriate committee (a committee that he is not a part of). I don’t think that his job as a senator would be to interfer with negotiations in a committee that he is not associated with.
As a Presidential Candidate, I think his job is to try to show the public that he has the ability and vision to be president. I’m not sure that this would be served by postponing a debate or suspending a campaign.
Please correct me if I am totally wrong. I think I would require more than 2 words though, since I’m pretty slow today.
Just watch what happens. McCain will vote “no” on the bailout, no matter what it is. Next week he will start bragging about how he tried to prevent Bush and Obama from taking Americans’ hard-earned money to give to Wall Street fat cats.
I didn’t hear any Republicans clamoring for him either. I’ll ask again, since nobody has an answer, what was McCain actually going to be able to DO, besides vote?
The last thing he was elected to do was represent his party as the presidential candidate. His “job” is to campaign and debate his opponent and make his case as to why he should run this country.
With less than 40 days left until the election to decide our next president, stepping away from his job to rejoin the legislative body where he is 1 of 535 is irresponsible. In regard to the current situation, he serves on no relevant committees, he has no relevant expertise.
He may as well have just called in sick for the past two days.
Word. I’ve seen people defend this move saying that McCain is doing the right thing because he’s a Senator first, and a presidential candidate second. But that’s simply not true. When we nominate someone to run for president, we the people are basically hiring that person to campaign for the next however many months. If I think what’s best for the country is McCain sitting in the White House in 2009, I’m going to vote for him in the primary.
Now we get down to the wire and McCain decides he wants to suspend his campaign so he can fly into Washington and act like he’s hammering out a deal where the other 500 people there who are working on it have failed. And of course, because it’s country first, he won’t be able to debate on Friday unless a deal is hammered out before then. Sorry, but that’s crap. The Republicans hired him to do a job: run for President. That has to be his number one priority. If this was the primaries, I’d cut him some slack. But this is the big leagues, and it’s the ninth inning.
If he wants to fly to Washington with his “I need to be educated on the economy” expertise for a photo op, that’s completely fine. But canceling the debate is unacceptable. We need to see what these candidates are made of and what they represent.
Where McCain might have been of use was in muscling in reluctant Republicans to vote for this. But the Democrats hold a majority in both houses of Congress, so I’m not seeing the need for him to do this, because almost all Democrats and some Republicans will, although reluctantly (in both parties - no one is happy about it), support this. And McCain doesn’t have a lot of pull with the extreme right-wing that would oppose it anyway. They’re going to be Barr or Ron Paul supporters.
No one was at each other’s throat in a partisan battle. This was hammered out pretty efficiently, as best I could tell. Not necessarily optimally by my preference - I think I would have preferred something like the RTC, rather than Treasury, handling it. But they’ve come to an agreement, and these are guys who have a lot more experience and knowledge on the topic than I do, and ideologically, they are largely in tune with my beliefs, so I’m willing to grant them the benefit of the doubt. I think they’ve managed to cover most of the common sense points that Obama had mentioned - points that anyone with a 100+ IQ would have come up with.
I’m still trying to decide if Section 8 of the original proposal was a poison pill meant to set off alarms, or the typical reflexive action of a White House that has thrived on abuse of power.
Pull strings. Rally support. Grease skids, that sort of thing.
Once this gets out of committee, all of Congress is going to have to be lined up and ready to go if they really want it passed by Monday. So besides actual negotiation on the bill, you need to build up a concessus of support among not only the Senate, but crosswise in the House and vice versa. And you know some douchebag is going to try to work some pork into it.
I’m not saying that McCain is the man for the job, but there is plenty of work to do outside actually writing the bill.
Except that I’m really not seeing a problem with this bill passing. We’re having the urgency of its passing rammed down our throats again and again. Now that the committees have come to an agreement, I think they’ll be able to get enough Congresscirtters in line to get it passed. While there may well be people seriously against it, I don’t think anyone is going to be so vehemently against it as to risk being the “Senator who Filibustered the US into a Depression,” which would be the only real risk. No one is happy about it, but a compromise has been achieved.
I’m not so sure. I’ve heard more than 1 representative wonder how they were going to explain it to their constituency, especially in places that haven’t been hit hard by the sub-prime mortgages.
Have you ever managed people? Phone calls, email, etc all go unanswered if the person in question doesn’t really want to do something. Sometimes walking over, standing right there, and asking point blank is necessary.
Just like the Internet. People behave different in person.
This is what party whips and leadership are for. John McCain has more pressing business to attend to, like trying to convince the American public why he should be president-- oh wait, that’s what this stunt was meant to do, isn’t it?
I’ve heard them too. But it doesn’t have to be unanimous. It just has to be a simple majority. Bush isn’t going to risk vetoing it, because Congress will turn around and say, “well, I guess it must not be that urgent then.”
Yes, I have and currently do manage people. I don’t agree with you, but I recognize that it is one type of management style.
One problem with it though, is that McCain does not manage the committee responsible for the bailout package. They indicated that they did not want them.
So I guess an analogy would be if I was in an internal job competition to become the CEO of a firm, and was currently one of 100 partners with the company. I manage projects in (let’s say) Information Technology.
Now there is a crisis in Accounts Payable. One of our clients is threatening not to pay. The accounting partners are working on it, and they’re trying to get an agreement to take to a general vote for the partners.
I don’t think I should blow off my upcoming Friday interview for the CEO position, and make a general announcement over the companies intercom that “I"m now going to Accounting to fix the problem that is going to become A CRISIS!!!” Especially if it is well known that accounting is not my strong suit.
If that is yoyr answer I have to officially say thats BS and you know it. Really, you can’t explain anythingmore than “his job”? I could use the same explanation for what Obama dies or anyone even myself. Hey, I was supposed to fix the printer in this office today but it was more important that I I blow that off and work on a DHCP protocl that we don’t need. But I was doing MY JOB.
Dammit, I am sick of this BS. Can you actually explain why McCain had to got to DC. Can you say anything that is relevant to the economy that he accomplished. No soundbites, no bs “HIS JOB” hand waving…what did he have to do?
If you read my previous post, you’ll note that I wasn’t talking about them, but rather the rest of Congress, who, while not actually in the committee, needs to be part of the consensus in order to pass the bill.
In your example, imagine that the Sales department wants to negotiate a lower bill for the account in order to save it, while the Accounting department just wants it paid in full. Wouldn’t that be a perfect opportunity for you, interviewing for the CEO position, to help work it out so it benefits the company as a whole, and not just the Sales or Accounting departments?