McCain suspends campaign, asks Obama to do the same. What?!

[Fish]

@RyJae

Then Obama should have came out and said…

No, the whole point of quietly creating consensus is that it isn’t grandstanding or self-glorifying. I actually respect Obama more for offering it privately, and McCain less for loudly trying to postpone the debates using the media as a messenger.

If McCain had any interest in working across the aisle he would have made that suggestion to Obama in private, not in a press conference.

If I were Obama, my response would have been something like, “Senator McCain has been asking for debates since this campaign began, and I am ready to oblige him. The debates are an important part of our democratic process, and they will go forward. America does not need another President who will put democracy on hold in a time of crisis in order to score political points.”

[RyJae]

@newcrasher

Where does it say that? Don’t make us read the entire article searching for your cite.

Paragraph 13 about 550 words in.

Mr. Obama successfully sought to flip the proposed topics for the first and third debates, so foreign policy is now coming first and economic and other domestic issues come last. There is a second debate, in the format of a town hall meeting, in which the candidates will sit on director’s chairs and take questions from the audience and Internet users on any topic.

[Richard_Parker]

@newcrasher

Where does it say that? Don’t make us read the entire article searching for your cite.

I didn’t think the exact quotes really added anything to this thread, given the indirectly-related nature of the comment. And anyone that didn’t believe my summary was welcome to read the relatively short article for himself (perhaps using the CTRL-F command). But here you go:

Mr. Obama wanted foreign policy first to show viewers that he could provide depth, strength and intelligence on those issues, his advisers said, given that Mr. McCain consistently wins higher ratings in opinion polls as a potential commander in chief.

[ . . . ]

Mr. McCain also wanted foreign policy topics to come first in the debates, his aides said, in the hope of capitalizing on his positive reputation on national security issues across party lines.

[Hawkeyeop]

This is brilliant. CNN is reporting that the McCain camp wants to move the president debate to when the VP debate is, and push back the VP debate indefinitely.

[RyJae]

@Hawkeyeop

This is brilliant. CNN is reporting that the McCain camp wants to move the president debate to when the VP debate is, and push back the VP debate indefinitely.

Is that on CNN.com? That would be a humiliating admission by the McCain camp that Palin sucks.

[Hawkeyeop]

@RyJae

Is that on CNN.com? That would be a humiliating admission by the McCain camp that Palin sucks.

On the channel. I don’t see it online yet.

[asterion]

@RyJae

Is that on CNN.com? That would be a humiliating admission by the McCain camp that Palin sucks.

Didn’t hear it on the CNN audio feed via XM (switched from CNN to NPR at 4), but here you go.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@RyJae

I follow the candidates, I follow the actions, and if the words follow the actions. They can say “I don’t want this package to pass” sitting in Florida and when it passes and people get pissed off down the road when it helps nothing. They can say “Look I said I didn’t want it to pass” but they didn’t go and LEAD the party, and go across the aisle to the otherside to make it not pass. Of course goes both ways, they can say I want it to pass with these conditions or whatever.

They are acting like politicians in a campaign where they both insisted they’re all about change. I called bullshit, and I stand by that call. All about protecting themselves, neither of them give a flying fuck about what you’re going through as a everyday American.

You really do seem impervious to what the two candidates CAN do at this point about the crisis. Not what you want them to do. What thay CAN do.

What they CANNOT do is ride in to Washington and make it all better with amorphous “actions” and “leadership”.

[RyJae]

@Euphonious_Polemic

You really do seem impervious to what the two candidates CAN do at this point about the crisis. Not what you want them to do. What thay CAN do.

What they CANNOT do is ride in to Washington and make it all better with amorphous “actions” and “leadership”.

Oh yes they can, either that or they will show they are not the leaders of the respective parties. If they're not effective in getting the party they represent, to agree with them what the fuck are they running to be the leader of everyone for? Not to mention both say they are all about working with both parties, now stop talking and show us.

ETA: What I want them to do is put actions in following the words they have both been spouting. Put that big ol’ name on the line. No matter which way they want to go, by not leading they are just protecting themselves. Which is, yes, politics as usual. FTR if it isn’t clear I don’t think any variation of this plan will do dick for the economy. So I am not looking for it to be made “all better” I just want both to actually do something they are talking about.

[RyJae]

@asterion

Didn’t hear it on the CNN audio feed via XM (switched from CNN to NPR at 4), but here you go.

He should just admit he made a mistake with his VP pick, but look ain’t she a pretty one!

Palin doesn’t really bother me, but I don’t think she is Presidential material. Then again this is coming from someone doesn’t think the top two make the grade either.

ETA: erased a double don’t

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

This is from Drudge. If this first part is true, McCain is going to look very bad on Letterman tonight:

David Letterman tells audience that McCain called him today to tell him he had to rush back to DC to deal with the economy.

Then in the middle of the taping Dave got word that McCain was, in fact just down the street being interviewed by Katie Couric. Dave even cut over to the live video of the interview, and said, “Hey Senator, can I give you a ride home?”

Letterman apparently kept cutting into McCain throughout the show:

“He can’t run the campaign because the economy is cratering? Fine, put in your second string quarterback, Sara Palin. Where is she?”

“What are you going to do if you’re elected and things get tough? Suspend being president? We’ve got a guy like that now!”

[Fish]

To me, reaching across the aisle is something you do — and not something you strive to be seen doing only when the microphones are on.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@RyJae

Oh yes they can, either that or they will show they are not the leaders of the respective parties. If they’re not effective in getting the party they represent, to agree with them what the fuck are they running to be the leader of everyone for? Not to mention both say they are all about working with both parties, now stop talking and show us.

ETA: What I want them to do is put actions in following the words they have both been spouting. Put that big ol’ name on the line. No matter which way they want to go, by not leading they are just protecting themselves. Which is, yes, politics as usual. FTR if it isn’t clear I don’t think any variation of this plan will do dick for the economy. So I am not looking for it to be made “all better” I just want both to actually do something they are talking about.

They are not president YET. They are Senators. Two senators out of 100. They are not on the committee that is dealing with this. There are people dealing with it. Is it not blatantly, blindingly obvious that by showing up and merely standing around being “leaderly”, that this will do more harm than good to the process?

I’m really at a loss as to what exactly you think they can do IN PRACTICAL CONCRETE TERMS, ie, not just amorphously “showing leadership” or “putting actions into words” or “working with both parties” These are meaningless, feel good statements.

[Bearflag70]

Did I hear correctly… McCain opts for the empty chair?

[Troy_McClure_SF]

@Euphonious_Polemic

They are not president YET. They are Senators. Two senators out of 100. They are not on the committee that is dealing with this. There are people dealing with it. Is it not blatantly, blindingly obvious that by showing up and merely standing around being “leaderly”, that this will do more harm than good to the process.

I agree. While the president should be advised and informed about such things, these two are not the president, and therefore those who would advise and inform are already working on the problem (one would hope).

[RyJae]

@Euphonious_Polemic

They are not president YET. They are Senators. Two senators out of 100. They are not on the committee that is dealing with this. There are people dealing with it. Is it not blatantly, blindingly obvious that by showing up and merely standing around being “leaderly”, that this will do more harm than good to the process?

I’m really at a loss as to what exactly you think they can do IN PRACTICAL CONCRETE TERMS, ie, not just amorphously “showing leadership” or “putting actions into words” or “working with both parties” These are meaningless, feel good statements.

I’ll put it nice and simple. Oh wait I have many times already.

[appleciders]

@BarnOwl

"Okay, I’ll come back to Washington to work out the matter, but let’s have the debate right there, on Friday What the hell, John it’s only 90 minutes,"says Obama.

This would be clever, especially if Obama poses it as an extra debate, not a pure substitution, so as not to offend the people in Mississippi who were going to watch the first one.

[SmartAleq]

@asterion

Didn’t hear it on the CNN audio feed via XM (switched from CNN to NPR at 4), but here you go.

I loved this quote from the comments on that story:

Lame: Congress needs McCain’s help like I need my 2 year old son’s help lifting a couch. It makes him feel good about himself, and important, but any mature observer knows that the 2 year old is being humored and is contributing little. McCain is asking us to smile at him, the economic two year old, while he goes to “fix” the economy.

Beautiful!

[WhyNot]

@RyJae

I’ll put it nice and simple. Oh wait I have many times already.

No, you haven’t. Not even once.

[MEBuckner]

This Wall Street meltdown thing is a crisis, but it’s not a Hurricane hitting New Orleans, Japanese attack Pearl Harbor type crisis. Part of the problem is that nobody knows what to do about it. Is this $700 billion bailout a good idea or not? What exactly does it even entail? There is widespread opposition to or questions about this bailout, from multiple points-of-view (from old school fiscal conservatives and supporters of laissez-faire capitalism to populists and liberals unhappy at bailing out Wall Street fatcats with taxpayer money).

This is a complicated subject; there isn’t some obvious answer (“Rush relief supplies to the suffering people!” “Declare war and whup the bastards!”). Instead of trying to steamroll this country into backing up a fleet of dump trucks and throwing $700 billion-with-a-B at…somebody, I would like to hear what these two men actually plan to do to get us out of this mess. What economic and fiscal policies do they each support in general?

So bring on the damned debate, already.