Fair enough magellan: it’s important to get this right. I see from Amazon’s preview that ethics investigator Robert Bennett also said on page 134 of his 2008 book that, “…”…the conduct of DeConcini, Cranston and Riegle was far worse than that of McCain and Glenn."
I haven’t read a persuasive claim that McCain broke the law beyond all reasonable doubt. Rather, the contention is that he sat on his hands as he witnessed criminal activity. This really is a matter of judgment and not criminality.
But from the point of view of the investigators of Lincoln Savings and Loan, McCain’s contribution was not constructive.
Look, McCain himself acknowledges his poor judgment – at least he did until this week. And I believe in penance. But what did the Senator learn from that experience? IIRC, McCain spoke of learning of the necessity of avoiding the appearance of impropriety. Ok, that’s a lesson. But, “Don’t get caught with your pants down”, isn’t enough.
The bigger lesson is that under the wrong regulatory structure, well connected financiers can take short cuts. They can avoid the hard work of identifying terrific investments and instead shift funds from the gullible to their own pockets. This sort of thing happens a lot less when those in charge heed certain warning signs, especially ones wrapped in subpoenas .
the funniest thing about that piece is at the very end
I have to say, also, that in my view if you start something with me I will finish it. I play Ender’s Game. So mad props to Obama for also playing Ender’s Game.
I understand the arguments the defenders have made in this thread, but I’m going to admit that I’m more than a little disillusioned. I knew it would happen, of course; this is politics in the real world, after all. But it’s still somewhat sad that the candidate who gave me hope because of the promise that he would rise above politics as usual is now just the better choice between two politicians.
I’ve never done more in politics than vote and whine, until this election. I’ve given money, I’ve signed up on Obama’s website, and I’ve even seriously considered giving some of my time as a volunteer (hey, for me, even considering that is a big step). But then the e-mails I was getting from David, Joe, Michelle and Barack - which used to start and end with information about what we all can do for our country on important issues and help get out Obama’s messge - quickly became all about John McCain. Sure, the Obama campaign’s version of going negative is far more civilized and on-target than the Rovian politics we’ve seen from the other side, but it’s not the message I care about.
Obama’s still got my vote, but he’s lost something far more important by playing the game this way.
I dunno why “disillusioned” is supposed to be a bad thing. Isn’t it good not to have illusions?
Obama was saying during the primary that he wouldn’t play as gently with the Republican candidate as he played with Clinton. He promised to play hardball. Anyone who thought he wouldn’t do so was illusioned.
This weekend, when I heard about the McCain plan to go ugly I told my wife that if Obama were smart he’d bring up Charles Keating. It’s sure fun to be right!
It’s true Obama has a good lead right now–but he also had a good lead before the Republican Convention, the last time those guys started going really negative. McCain is going really negative now because he thinks it’ll work. His advisors–some of the smartest, craftiest politicians around–think it’ll work.
Obama doesn’t want it to work. He’s trying to thwart their strategy, nip it in the bud. He doesn’t want to see a repeat of the Pub Convention.
Ignoring their negativity DIDN’T work last time (remember all the handwringing about why isn’t Obama further ahead?). This might work.
Sinaijon, given the demonstrable inefficacy of ignoring the attacks, what alternate strategy would you suggest for Obama?
I emphatically disagree. The “message” is “John McCain has, and presumably will, put his own financial interests and the interests of his friends above those of the American people”, and it’s an important message. It’s what got us into that mess, and it’s what got us into this mess, and the messes will keep coming if John McCain and his ilk remain in office.
It entertains me no end that people are actually comparing this to “he pals around with terrorists” as though they are claims of equal negativity, let alone of equal merit. Just to be very clear… that whole Keating thing? Actually happened.
His friends have called him “Barry”. Although a bit of rhetoric on my part (it’s not like his personal e-mails to me are really personal), that’s how I meant it - friendly advice, not derision. You can, of course, feel free to try to jam me into whatever peg-hole you feel you need to.
DianaG, I still don’t care about that message, although, like I said, I understand why people do. I care about the message that Senator Obama will not stoop to cronyism and will promote transparency and accountability in government.
The negative tactics between the campaigns are worth looking at side-by-side, and that comparison is highly unfavorable to the McCain campaign. I understand that; I just mean to throw my two cents in, saying I’d rather that the Obama campaign had chosen a higher road than it has.
Good points, Left Hand of Dorkness. I’m no political strategist, and likely too idealistic for such things.
Indeed. Or maybe you just like supporting people who lose.
Some of you people need to get a grip. You’re allowing GOP talking points to tweak your consience. They don’t give a fuck, they just want to win. Obama is making a very serious point here about McCain’s character and history during financial troubles.
The world is in financial trouble now and people should see what was in McCain’s past.
I watched the video last night. They did an excellent job with it. Its nowhere close to the level of shit the Republican’s just make up. Whatever William Ayers might have done in the 60’s is way old news. To portray him as a terrorist is silly.
In any event, whatever chance they may have had a month ago is gone now. They’re not going to be able to convince the country the economic crisis is the Democrats fault.
I would have been a bit pissed if this was released earlier on in the process. But this is a fair response to an opponent who has betrayed everything he stands for. McCain has already snuck brass knuckles on during a fair fight, and I have absolutely no problem with this acknowledgement that there is now a different game afoot.
If we are reminding people of the candidates past associations and poor judgement by association, Keating is absolutely on-point. And McCain now has to spend some time defending it, which takes away from his ability to ply the ridiculous terrorist line.
If you are in a barfight, and your opponent picks up a pool cue, you are not somehow more honorable if you stick with your fists and take your beating like a man.
Continue to pound him on the current economic crisis. Pound him on taxes and health care. Pound him for negative campaigning. It’s working well and the public loves it.
If somebody sucker punches you from behind in the kidney, I think it’s fine to turn around and respond with an upper cut to the jaw. Why wait for him to turn around so you can sucker punch him back, especially if you’ve been landing well scored upper cuts all night?
Yes, well, Ender regretted playing the game in the end because he had a conscience and had thought that it was a game. Obama knows this is not a game, and I am sure he’d prefer to not “go there”. But we are here, through no initiative of our own, so we play in this arena to the best of our ability.
What is it with people? Obama would have to be Christ-like in order to maintain your approval. It’s an insanely high bar to set for any candidate.
Given the shit spewed out by one Johnnie May (GOP in VA)–see the McCain goes negative thread, I’d like Obama to just call McCain and all his filth out on the carpet. Show America what they really are.
Flinging the Ayers stuff at Obama is ‘turning around’? You might have a point if McCain had backed off the negatives and then Obama struck at him, but that isn’t the case. McCain went for a low blow, but Obama deflected it and sent one back. McCain’s just getting a taste of his own medicine. What’s important is that Obama did not go there first. That makes the difference.
I don’t see Obama as some Christ figure, someone who truly is above politics. No, he clearly knows politics, otherwise he wouldn’t be where he is now. Where he presents a change from the common politician is that, as far as anyone has been able to determine, integrity is more than a buzzword for him. He really does seem to be more interested in helping the country than getting re-elected or taking what he can while he can. But to do that he needs to get elected, and so he has to play the campaign game.
The best analogue I can come up with at this moment is Harvey Dent in The Dark Knight (before he went crazy). He was above the normal Gotham corruption, but he was by no means a weak or passive person.
I remember in 04’ hoping beyond hope Kerry would fight back, and he never did. This time around, not only is Obama fighting back, but he seems to already be anticipating the negatives, and already has a sub-compact machine gun locked and loaded…Good on him. He’s got a lot of dems jumping up and down saying whohooo! Good Job!!! I’m sure the republicans are not feeling very good about getting tattered like this. Well, what comes around goes around good or bad. Karma is a Bitch.
You left out the part where a Palin supporter tolda black cameraman “Sit down, boy” (about paragraph 11 in the link).
And, in another rally, when McCain asked “Who is the real Barack Obama?”, someone in the crowd might have replied “A terrorist!”. I honestly didn’t hear it well enough to say for sure, but it looks like McCain heard the guy say something that made him catch for a second.
I disagree. McCain is going negative now because he and his advisors know they don’t have any other choice. It’s not that they think it will work; it’s that they know it’s the only approach that might work. Small distinction.
