Jack & Jill Politics

Uh oh.

The Senate will vote on the bill tomorrow evening.

The trap is set.

I should wait to post this in the Weds Open Thread, but this is important:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/01/business/econ...

...Why it sucks but we have to help out Wall Street.

Michelle Malkin bugs.


TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 2008

Michelle Malkin wrote about debate moderator Gwen Ifell today at Investor's Business Daily:

My dictionary defines "moderator" as "the nonpartisan presiding officer of a town meeting." On Thursday, PBS anchor Gwen Ifill will serve as moderator for the first and only vice presidential debate. The stakes are high. The Commission on Presidential Debates, with the assent of the two campaigns, decided not to impose any guidelines on her duties or questions.

But there is nothing "moderate" about where Ifill stands on Barack Obama. She's so far in the tank for the Democratic presidential candidate, her oxygen delivery line is running out.

In an imaginary world where liberal journalists are held to the same standards as everyone else, Ifill would be required to make a full disclosure at the start of the debate.

She would be required to turn to the cameras and tell the national audience that she has a book coming out on Jan. 20, 2009 — a date that just happens to coincide with the inauguration of the next president of the United States. The title of Ifill's book? "The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama."

Nonpartisan my foot.

Random House, her publisher, is already busy hyping the book with YouTube clips of Ifill heaping praise on her subjects, including Obama and Obama-endorsing Mass. Gov. Deval Patrick. The official promo for the book gushes:

"In 'The Breakthrough,' veteran journalist Gwen Ifill surveys the American political landscape, shedding new light on the impact of Barack Obama's stunning presidential campaign and introducing the emerging young African-American politicians forging a bold new path to political power.

"Drawing on interviews with power brokers like Sen. Obama, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, Vernon Jordan, the Rev. Jesse Jackson and many others, as well as her own razor-sharp observations and analysis of such issues as generational conflict and the 'black enough' conundrum, Ifill shows why this is a pivotal moment in American history."

Ifill and her publisher are banking on an Obama-Biden win to buoy her book sales. The moderator expected to treat both sides fairly has grandiosely declared this the “Age of Obama.” Can you imagine a right-leaning journalist writing a book about the “stunning” McCain campaign and its “bold” path to reform timed for release on Inauguration Day – and then expecting a slot as a moderator for the nation’s sole vice presidential debate?

Despite the protestations of her colleagues that she will be fair, Ifill has appeared on numerous radio and TV talk shows over the past several months to cash in on her access to the Obama campaign. She recently penned a fawning cover story on the Obamas for Essence magazine that earned much buzz. The title? “The Obamas: Portrait of an American Family.” A sample of Ifill’s hard-hitting investigative journalism, illustrated with Kennedyesque photos of the Obamas and children posing at home on the backporch and by the piano.

Like Obama, Ifill, who is black, is quick to play the race card at the first sign of criticism. In an interview with the Washington Post a few weeks ago, she carped: “[N]o one’s ever assumed a white reporter can’t cover a white candidate.”
It’s not the color of your skin, sweetie. It’s the color of your politics. Perhaps Ifill will be able to conceal it this week. But if the “stunning” “Breakthrough” she’s rooting for comes to pass on January 20, 2009, nobody will be fooled.

VP Presidential questions by Couric will be aired tomorrow.

Couric asked Palin which magazines or newpapers she reads to stay on top of the issues that go on today.

She could not answer. She said all of them anything that is put in front of her.

Couric asked specifically which one -- Palin went into -- people believe Alaska is a foreign country and it is not blah blah blah

She couldn't even say "The Wasilla Times?"

unreal. she couldnt even lie?

How could she lie? She doesn't know any of the names of papers. She did the best she could do other than creating a fictional paper!

Where Should the Bar Be Set for Sarah Palin?

At this point, the bar is that Sarah Palin must prove to a concerned American public that she is qualified to be a heartbeat from the presidency. Most especially under a 72-year old candidate with serious health issues.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-j-elisberg...

rikyrah: Hopefully!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/30/analys...
Bailout Failure Puts McCain At A Political Dead End

This is from the AP:Republican John McCain has maneuvered himself into a political dead end and has five weeks to find his way out.

Last Wednesday, McCain suspended his presidential campaign to insert himself into a $700 billion effort to rescue America's crumbling financial structure. In so doing, he tied himself far more tightly to the bill than did his Democratic opponent, Barack Obama.

The article shows a LOVELY "political map" - LOTS OF BLUE! :>)

Obama-Biden '08!!

hehehehe...

This is funny. I found this over at DK.

A Fox news reporter went to a diner in Pennsylvania and asked the people that were inside, who they were going to vote for in the Presidential election. Everybody raised there hand for Obama and the reporter announced that it was split decision. You can hear the people laughing in the background.

Oh and there was one little couple were it appeared that the husband was going to raise his hand when the reporter asked for who was going to vote for McCain, she slapped it down.

Video

That's pretty funny.

LOL...I could totally see myself slapping my husband's hand if he said he was voting for McCain.

LOL....

I wanted to let JJP know about the ridiculousness I saw over at the Fox News website.
They have a forum that asks if it is"Cute or Creepy?"regarding a Youtube video that is circulating of a 22-member children's group named "Sing for Change." The group sings original songs as an homage to Obama. It is so sad that Fox would even ask if the children are creepy. And you know the comments in the forum are eqaully disgusting and sad.

Wouldn't expect anything less from Fox News

rikyrah: David continues to put McAncient "on blast!"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/30/david-...
Letterman vs John McCain: He bailed out on me! :>)

David Letterman Monday continued to demonstrate to John McCain that lying to the late night host is never a good idea.

In his monologue, Letterman used a joke about the bailout to hit McCain for canceling last week, saying, "Senator John McCain is in favor of the bailout. He loves bailouts — he bailed out on me."

Later, in an interview with Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Letterman continued going after McCain, mentioning that not only did McCain not get on a plane to Washington when he told Letterman he was, but he also stayed the night in New York to speak to the UN the following morning.

Ya jes DON'T LIE to Letterman!! :>)


Obama-Biden '08!!

Happy Rosh Hashanah

Someone posted a reference to the fact republicans had ObamaBush ads already printed before the failure of the vote. If anyone sees this post would they send it by disqus or write a post saying where they saw it.
Thank you.

Ben Smith reported this over on Politico today:

RNC ad, was cut, sent out before package failed

The Republican National Committee's new advertisement critical of the the Wall Street "bailout" was produced and sent to television stations in key states before the package failed, officials at two stations said.

"Wall Street Squanders our money. And Washington is forced to bail them out with -- you guessed it -- our money. Can it get any worse?" asks the ad's narrator, as the words "BAILOUT WITH OUR MONEY" cross the screen. (The answer: Obama's plans would make it worse.)

The ad, however, seems to assume that it can safely attack a successful plan. And the reason may be the timing: Though it started airing this morning, the spot was released to stations yesterday morning, ad executives at stations in Michigan and Pennsylvania said.

Kae Buck of WLNS in Lansing said her station received the at at 7:55 a.m. Monday. Luanne Russell of Pittsburgh's WTAE said her station received it at 10:49 Monday morning.

The ad taps into deep resentment of the plan, but it comes at a time when the candidate it supports, John McCain, is urging its package, and asking that it not be referred to as a "bailout," but a "rescue."

Asked about the ad's relationship to the congressional legislation, the consultant heading up the RNC's expenditure, Brad Todd, responded in an email that Obama is its focus.

"This ad is about Barack Obama’s spending plan," he said. "Last Friday in the debate he struggled to name even one spending proposal he would responsibly trim in light of the economic crisis and any potential bailout plan. Senator Obama clings to his big spending approach even today and our ad campaign will focus attention on that irresponsible position."

UPDATE: Asked if he has any regrets about an ad that seems to cut against McCain's message, Todd reiterated his criticism of the fact that Obama hasn't altered spending plans in light of the crisis, and added: "In all seriousness....what planet are you on?"

Thank you again

Obama is already POTUS

CNN is reporting the FDIC is asking for a temporary hike in $100K limit.

And McCain is claiming it as his idea in all of his stump speeches today.

that is crazy since this morning on Morning Joe he credited Obama with this idea! At least stick with 1 theme....

That changed by 9:00 EST to "I propose we increase the limit to $250,000. " It wasn't support, it was propose.

that dude is bugging...

It was probably during the 8 o'clock hour EST that he credited Barack this morning.

What else is new?

Preview: Behind The Scenes With Sarah Palin - tonight's segment

http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/couricandco/mai...

Have you all seen this? Picked it up at Ben Smith's at politico.

T.

Obama, in Reno NV, statement on the financial legislation

Sorry if this has already been posted somewhere here and I just didn't see it..

oops, now I see T posted a TPM link just below that has the same text...

Anti Obama sign reads - Obama is a half-breed Muslin (yes the spelling is intentional)


http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2008/09/30/...

A mind is a terrible thing to waste.

So is Obama half Muslin, half polyester?

High Risk, High Reward Move? Frankly, this would not be my preference, but let's see how it plays out.

T.

Petition to boot Tom Brokaw as Debate Moderator. Please sign and pass on. If anyone has connections with Daily Kos, please post there as well.


http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/boot-brokaw-as...

Yep Val. I just read the article about Brokaw being a "liason" between NBC and MTP. That nails it for me. Goodbye MTP. Russert was truly the last of fair, objective journalism.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/arts/televisi...

I thought Brokaw was legit. Guess I was wrong.

I thought so too, until I watched MTP last Sunday when Brokaw pulled out the old poll that supported McCain, at the last minute of the show. I said WTF? Axelrod's expression was priceless!! Time to boycott MTP.

Brokaw hates Obama - pay attention.

Of course he does.

Which is why Barack is allowing him to moderate the Town Hall.

He ain't scared.

yes. his commentary during the republican convention was disgusting. reminiscing with some other racist has-been about the "good ol' days"...

Completely random:

Adding another future conservative to the family next year. Due date is sometime in May.

I'm chiming in all late and thangs. :) Congratulations D!!! I'll be sure to get an Obama '08 onesie for the baby.

http://store.barackobama.com/Obama_Baby_Onesie_...

P.S. Whenever the wife is craving for fresh strawberries in the middle of winter, you'd better find a way to get them for her. Heh.....best of luck. Hope it's a girl.

Oh how sweet, a little May flower!

D: I'm going to send a"virtual 'LIBERAL' computer " to the "little one" for the "virtual baby shower" that Texas_Girl proposed! :>)

CONGRATULATIONS to the D Family!! :>)

Obama-Biden '08!!

Hey D. Congrats man!

Congratulations!

Awww....a little "D".

Congrats!

But I don't know about the "future conservative" part.

Congratulations! You realize that every generation finds its own way to rebel against its parents, right?

But you'll love 'em anyway

Congrats D! :-)

Congrats, D.

Congratulations!

But just to help you be prepared because you seem not to be :) -- re: "future conservative" --- You do know that your child may turn out to be left of center politically, yes? It's just .... I assume you will love and cherish this person whatever his/her poliltics turn out to be.

Thanks. And of course I will.

But I can be hopeful, right? :)

Just think of you & your son bonding:

He checks out your iPod and says, "Dad, who's Parliament?"

Parliament, heck they'll be asking "Dad, who's Rianna?"

I almost cried when my nephew asked about Tribe Called Quest. I still play the "Low End Theory" like it just came out. I'm getting old.

CONGRATULATIONS D.

It is a good thing Barack will be president just in time to make sure you have quality healthcare and your kid(s) can get the chance of having a great education.

:-)

LOL!

There was brief (about 30 seconds worth) discussion of naming him Barack (if there's a boy). That died quickly.

Just don't name him Sarah.

Your vote for Barack would be good enough. Consider it a downpayment on your kids future.

I have a feeling a bunch of "Baracks" and "Michelles" will come into this world in 2009.

Don't forget ...Change. You know how creative we get with names

Ba'Raq

BahRock

Barok

B'rocka

B'raq

LaBarack

Town: Ba-Rack -D! [As in - Baracked The Vote!]

O.K. I'm tha-rough!! :>) :>)

Obama-Biden '08!!

one more Baraque'

Now, who would name......wait, don't answer that....

Twins. Change and Hope. There you go.

D: HOPE you know that you will CHANGE [that diaper] ERRYDAY!! Go Obama!! :>)

those are hot twin names!

Congrats, D. You know I am not sure the Bush twins are voting McCain and their Daddy is the president. Aren't they coy on their personal party affiliations. In fact, Megan might not have voted for McCain if he wasn't her Daddy, lol!

Bridget can't vote but I'm pretty sure if she could she wouldn't vote for the race-baiting GOP.

According to some random blog, it was noted that in Asian culture seating is done according to position and power. So Bridget may decide to vote Obama to demand some respect in her family!

HAHAHA...

Right..

Congratulations!!

Congrstulations! Appreciate the blessing :)

Congrats big fella. But not to worry: "Uncle Ronnie" will make sure that the little bambino learns all about the left side of life. ;-)

You, and the mrs., and the grandparents...... :)

D,

We will have a virtual baby shower for you

Congrats!!!

Awww.... that's lovely! *sniffle*

For fans of Nate at fivethirtyeight.com. I'm praying this guy is right on point. Today he has the electoral count as 329.3 for Obama and 208.7 for McCain. Also, realclearpolitics daily average has Obama up by 5 pts over McCain today.

If you want to see/hear Nate, he will be on the following......got this from his website.

"More Media
Busy, busy, busy.

1. I'm beginning a live chat at the Washington Times ASAP -- as in RIGHT NOW. Happy to take any of your questions.

2. Tonight at 8 PM Eastern (re-airing at 11 PM Eastern), HDNet is airing a very, very in-depth segment that I shot with Dan Rather. It was a thrill to meet Dan, and I hope you'll enjoy the segment. We also hope to have a clip for you shortly.

3. Tomorrow, there will be another opportunity to chat with me at the Washington Post, where I'll be doing a joint segment with Pollster.com's Charles Franklin at Noon Eastern.

4. Finally, I may be on the MSNBC lineup tonight, but details are still coming together on that."

My people, What's up? Just stopping in here for a nanosec. About the bill yesterday. I was watching when it went down. It was an accident. Around 1.51p, I checked the numbers for/against on either side. I had to rub my eyes 'cause I could not believe what I was seeing. I swivelled in my chair to face my computer to start watching the market indices. My mouth fell wide open. WTF? But, get this? I am whispering now. Between you and I and whoever, I was secretly pleased it tanked yesterday. I feel terrible.

I was feeling a li'l uneasy, not only about the bill itself, but also, the way the votes were being cast. Looked to me like Obama and the rest of the Dems were being set up to get the blame for this. Mc and his people were just waiting for it to pass with the minimum of votes from their own party, FOR THEIR OWN BILL! Can you believe it? My friends thought I was just being partisan and disagreed with me, until I just saw this from Yglesias at thinkprogress:

"The House conservatives who sank the bailout didn’t do so because they were listening to loud and angry voices. They sank the plan by accident. They were trying to double-cross the Democrats. First, they wrung lots of concessions out of Democrats at the negotiating table as the price for delivering 80 votes. Then, by not delivering 80 votes and forcing Pelosi to pass the bill as a partisan Democratic bill, they were going to wage a demagogic anti-bailout campaign. But Pelosi refused to be played for a sucker and so the conservative inadvertently sank a bill that, all evidence suggests, they actually wanted to pass. They just wanted to vote “no” on it for short-term political gain. "

Yeah, man! I believe it. Listen, I know something must be done. This decision makes you want to puke, but look 5 financial institutions went down in Europe and America yesterday. 777 hit on the Dow. Money markets being affected. Liquidity is the key here. Soemthing has to be done. But, there is a lot of uncertain elements around this bill. No guarantees. If I were to run a valuation analysis on these worthless pieces of paper now, I wouldn't know where to start and how to project out a year, much less five. As a matter fact, why would you have to wait FIVE YEARS(a time after the end of Obama's first term) before the president has the power to take some action to recoup all the tax payer money, if that had not yet happened? Why $700b?

Now, these legislators need to take this grace period that's been handed to them(a gift as far as I am concerned) and try to either make the bill better(well as best as they can); and/or, do a better job in saying to the American people, "we are trying to make do with a bad situation here. give us a little leeway".

Besides, I think Paulson and Bernanke must be pressed to tell us how, in their best guess, this is expected to work. And, what are the criteria they will use to measure whether or not their initial stabilization efforts are effective, before they get any additional monies after the first 250b. Because, the modified bill says they get 250b first, then another 100b at the discretion of the president. Isn't that like giving them 350b upfront?

More later,
T.
ps. I'm rushing so sorry for errors.

Republican presidential nominee John McCain is urging the Treasury Department to intervene aggressively to limit damage from the financial meltdown, action that McCain says President Bush can take with the stroke of a pen.

Opening a business round-table Tuesday in Des Moines, Iowa, McCain said he has urged the Treasury to use its exchange stabilization fund "as creatively as possible" to backstop the market crisis. He says officials also should use the authority granted in a housing bill to purchase up to a trillion dollars in mortgages
*********************************************************************************************8
On MSNBC Andrea Mitchell validated that there is no authority to grant a housing bill to purchase a trillion dollars in mortgages.

rikyrah: Here's a good descriptor:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/amb-richard-c-hol...
Holbrooke: CALM METHODICAL OBAMA vs angry, ungracious McCain

Friday's unique free-form debate format offered the best insights so far into the vast differences, values and style of Barack Obama and John McCain, and how they would approach the challenges that only a president can decide. It was the stunning contrast in personal behavior, not their answers, that was most revealing.

SKIP

This difference was reinforced by the much-noted failure of McCain to look in Obama's direction or address him directly during the debate, and by the grim looks that left many viewers with the impression McCain was just plain angry.

The overall effect was exactly the opposite of what McCain hoped to achieve: Obama showed that he could handle the frontal assaults of an aggressive and seasoned senator-war hero in the very area McCain was perceived to be strongest. Obama offered the larger vision for the nation--and a reassuring sense he would approach issues with the seriousness they required. The gambling, brawling style of John McCain has its attractive side to Americans, but it is not what we need in the White House in these troubled times.

TRUTH!!!

To Black Mike, The sons-o-bitches have already started using military control to take tyrant-like control of our republic. I was in St. Paul, Minnesota during the RNC. My friend and I took several photos from her apartment, since we felt it wasn't safe to be on the street! The majority of the protestors were white. We saw them throw a thin white women down t o the ground, pushed her hands behind her back with her face near horsehit from the horses they rode in on. It was like a scene from Tiananmen Square, minus the killing. The RNC ordered "robo cops" and the National Guard into St. Paul to terrorizie the protesters. Outside,there was nothing but fear and chaos during that convention. Straight out of a sci-fi movie!

From MSNBC First Read:

*** A Buckeye bonanza for Dems? Early voting begins today in the battleground of Ohio, as well as in Nebraska. Lost in the news of yesterday’s bailout failure and the plummeting Dow was a court decision in Ohio that could have big implications in the presidential race. In a 4-3 decision, the Ohio Supreme Court upheld same-day voter registration and absentee ballot casting -- a ruling that could help Obama in the state. "The outcome of the court battles is likely to benefit Democrats in a state that narrowly awarded President Bush re-election in 2004," the AP writes. "Obama's campaign has organized car pools beginning Tuesday from college campuses to early voting sites. The Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless is ferrying voters from homeless shelters to polling sites in the Cleveland area. Other organizations that seek to increase poor and minority participation in elections are transporting voters from low-income neighborhoods. The targeted voters have all traditionally had a harder time getting registered, and then getting to polling places on Election Day. Thanks to Monday's court decisions, these Democratic-leaning voters can do it all at once."

that's why I posted the Ohio information. It's time for all the folks in Ohio to go pick up Pookey and Pookey's friends, and take them to register and then vote. If you have to feed them a meal afterwards, consider it a donation to the Obama campaign. :)

hahhaaa!!!

Right!

Hey, I will do it in a heart beat.

Friend of mine is on the Obama legal team in OH -- this is an incredible victory for democracy (lower-case "d") and, right now, Democrats.

Texas: Very informative!! :>) Thanks! :>)

Obama-Biden '08!!

This Week in Blackness, Episode 7

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/elon-james-white/...

What's y'all's take on this?

African-American opposition also killed the Bailout Bill

Surely the demonization of Wall Street played a role in this African-American opposition. Apparently, the African-America community did not see how the bill would benefit them and wanted some goodies thrown-in as the cost of their support.

I can't tell if it's supposed to be incendiary (sp), or what.

The republican party killed the bailout bill.

D, I would take that with multiple grains of salt.

After all, Washington Mutual's failure is being blamed on too much diversity in their employment, and providing financial services to too many Hispanics (read, "allowing them Mexicans to get loans and opening bank accounts when they're illegal' shyt).

Anything not to place the blame where it needs to be: on Greedy Old White Guys.

You know the deal. Apart from Ken Chenault at American Express, Dick Parsons at Time Warner, Stan O'Neal at Morgan Stanley - who really had the access to make the decisions that led to the failure of Wall Street. There weren't enough Brothas on Wall Street to pay for play, let alone make the decisions to pressure Hank Paulson or Ben Bernanke to drop interest rates when the Fed should have been raising them or stabilizing them.

When I was in England, I got access to a wonderfully informative documentary on the history of the Federal Reserve Board. It's worth a watch and you can download it from this site:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5232639...

Watch that and find out why the country is really jacked up on the economic scale.

See, white congresspersons and white citizens are against the bill because they don't want big government and socialism and a big tax burden on the taxpayers.

Black congresspersons and black citizens are against the bill because we don't get enough handouts.

Got it?

lol. you are on a roll today Town.

It's definitely supposed to be incendiary. I personally, don't know what the beef is with ACORN, but the implication is that because the "ACORN provisions" were stripped out, African Americans were opposed to the bill, but then the article goes on to discuss how the talk show host encouraged listeners to put pressure on their reps to investigate the bill more--so which one is it? Were African Americans looking for another handout as this article implies, or did people rightfully speak up about getting more information about the possible impact of the bill.

This seems to be a fail safe in the last couple of days. We have gone from blaming Blacks for causing the mortgage crisis, to now blaming Obama and the Black community in general for not getting the legislation passed. How convenient.

Acorn is now a red flag word. I see it popping up everywhere. They are going to try to settle all this on minority loans. This scapegoating is really making me mad.

That, and the Community Reinvestment Act as well.

Of course it's supposed to be incendiary, but I don't care. Black folks don't believe that this bill has anything to do with them. When they hear about the WaMu guy working 3 weeks and getting 18 million, they're not feeling this bailout, when our community has been hit hard by this mortgage crisis. We want more for Main Street- that's my thing. I don't dispute some serious shit is happening out there. I know that. I also know that the same mofos who played with this market like it was monopoly money, now want the average American to give them MORE money. When we asked for help for the common man, what did we get?

' They were irresponsible'.

Well, now the common man is saying FUCK YOU, BACK.

I think the Dems should just push forth the bill with everything they want for Main Street, and stricter controls, and no exec. compensation. No mofos should get rich off of this.

I agree with the FYB feeling -- but then again I've been steaming over the Ponzi scheme for several years now.

The thing I can't figure out is how URGENT is this crisis. Is the worldwide economy going to collapse next month? next week? TOMORROW?

The more urgent it is, the more I'm willing to compromise. Partly because I'm cynical enough to believe that the rich & powerful will get their cut no matter what we do. So transparency is more important to me than compensation caps.

anyway, can anyone answer just how dangerous the current situtation? I'm also sensing that it's SO dangerous that NOTHING we can do will save us... in which case, better to do nothing.

Ugh. i feel ill.

My take is it's serious. We just need to bite the bullet cause the wealth are always going to get their share. That's a given so we need to get over that shit.

This si not a Bail out Plan it is a 911 emergency plan. We have to save the BIG companies because they impact the small ones. The thing that scares me the most is the credit crunch because it affects pay checks and credit cards. Companies will start to lower credit limits and stop issuing new credit. Your employer probably pays you from a credit account. Small business get supplies on credit. Economics is not a exact science and you can't prove cause and effect but I don't want to find out.

The economy needs a jolt. Maybe not a $700B one but it need something. People with enough money to cover them for a few months can live to see a better plan drawn up but those who live from check to check will feel it first.

it is serious. My dad (78) invested most of his retirement funds and it is already slashed almost in half.

Luckily he lives with me.

I'm sorry to hear about that. A lot of us are hurting already, but we have a ways to go before we gotta start selling.

Be well and DON'T PANIC

That's horrible. I was listening to the radio this morning and they had some Wall Street analyst talking about how this is nowhere near a depression. If that's the case, I'd hate to see what they consider a depression.

Damn!

"When we asked for help for the common man, what did we get?
' They were irresponsible'.
Well, now the common man is saying FUCK YOU, BACK. "

yes, THIS exactly.

In the end it may prove counter-productive, but it is the immediate visceral emotional response to a government that stood by last year and let Rome start to burn and seemingly only now is willing to open the hydrants and connect the hoses.

The roof is on fire, indeed.

The hostages have taken hostages.

I hear you.

Thing is, if the dhimmicrats do that, and the bailout fails, they're left holding the bag. It won't matter in '08, but it damn sure will in '10.

This is absolutely the most stupid thing I have ever seen you post 'D' . If anything we are likely to be celebrated for not giving Wall Street Fat Cats anything. As for Democrats taking the blame that isn't going to happen either. This vote was to show you cared more about your country than your partisan issue(s). The Republicans FAILED like the irresponsible trcicksters they are. They enjoy keeping their constitutiences ignorant and enflamed over whether or not some one is gay or wants an abortion and ignorant about how the economy really works so they can find ways to appropriate anything they can. The Republicans are the ones whose mantra is the markets work best without ANY REGULATION and they are responsible for bringing the situtation to a head now.

That said one of the things I have tried to do is start a conversation about economic issues and their relationship to every other issue. We know too much about being screwed over even if we do not know how it happened. I wrote, in regard to this bill, that we need it and why. I have also said there are issues we should see in the bill which will directly help our community and by definition other disenfranchised communities.

I am happy that the Republicans choked on their own partisan bile, because it will give us another opportunity to influence the legislation.
The influence we want to exert is to see that the bankruptcy code be changed so that mortgage contracts can be written for legitimate bankrupted people. It is possible to do so already for vacation and second homes. The other thing we need is to make it MANDATORY that every mortgage holder whom is underwater(that is the mortgage is worth more than the house) have their mortgage renegotiated. Otherwise the incentive is to walk away-you are already taking a credit hit so how much worse can it get)-and let the bank/mortgage company deal w/ it in foreclosure. Foreclosure SUCKS because the community is even more negatively impacted because the home is for sale at any price and that affects you directly if you own a home. It effects you because if you're current and your home has held value it has just been forced down in value because the seller is selling to avoid loss for the mortgage co.

So call your legislator and let him know not how you FEEL but WHAT and WHY you know this bill can be better for the average citizen. Then tell him how PISSED OFF you are it has come to this. Nothing wrong w/ being angry if you provide a real solution.

"The influence we want to exert is to see that the bankruptcy code be changed so that mortgage contracts can be written for legitimate bankrupted people. It is possible to do so already for vacation and second homes"

This is infuriating. But then again, many of the discrepancies in the present tax code are.

Actually Rob M , D. makes a good point. Rethugs are looking at the Dems carrying this bailout, and in essence turn the American public against them.

Newt Gingrich last week commented that McCain need to play his "maverick" card and make this the Obama-Bush bailout plan. He went as far as saying that "........if the plan is enacted, then in addition to being a "dead loser" on Nov. 4 (for which ever candidate votes for it), it will damage its congressional proponents even more severely in 2010--once Americans see it as a corrupt scheme.."

GIngrich voiced opposition against this plan throughout the past week until yesterday morning before the vote ----however journalists are reporting today that he whipped many Republicans into opposition of the bailout yesterday despite his "supposed" support of the bill. Newt Gingrich, John McCain and the Rethugs are politicizing this bailout and hoping its passage---if that ever occurs--will create a backlash against the Democrats---opening up gains for Republicans in 2010. That is exactly the reason why McCain won't commit publicly and I am glad it did not pass---because we would be seeing Obama-Bush commercials today.
Even if a new proposal is drawn up, John McCain will vote "nay" despite what he says in public.

I wrote more abou this further down.

The split in the Senate is 51/49 dems and only because Bernie Saunders(I) vote w/ the Dems unlike that KAPO Lieberman. there was no way that vote was coming down to just the Democrats in the Senate. the Republicans were in the negotaitions from day one. The House was more dicey because they have to orginate finance bill by authority of the constitution. If anybody bears even more responsiblity it is the Presidency for going over the House's head to the Senate. But that isn't what they whined about.

I'll grant you there would be Obama-Bush ads if Obama had came back to DC and started negotiations publicy as I advocated. for me the trade off is Country First and REAL LEADERSHIP counters. I know Obama would not let a bill go to the floor without knowing before hand whom was going to votefor nothing. we do not call him Obama No Drama

It can't be that dumb; Pelosi essentially said she didn't want a majority of her people voting for the bill without some significant Republican support. And I agree with her.

It is a victory for the American people. And, in a slight nod of respect, I have to credit the Obama ascendancy for a part of that. People who have never paid attention to stuff like this are now, to their benefit. Remains to be seen how many will still care on November 5th, but a measure of credit is due.

D I agree with you on this (can't believe I said that). The Dems wanted this to be a shared effort it was a political play and the GOP didn't come through on their end.


Obama/Biden 08

"D I agree with you on this (can't believe I said that). "

RAOTFL

great points.

Are we absolutely certain Caribou Barbie has a college degree? Did she buy it online? Not to be elitist or uppity, but it seems the VPOTUS should be proficient in English...

Ms. Couric asked Ms. Palin for her reaction to complaints that she is not ready for prime time.

“Not only am I ready but willing and able to serve as vice president with Senator McCain if Americans so bless us and privilege us with the opportunity of serving them, ready with my executive experience as a city mayor and manager, as a governor, as a commissioner, a regulator of oil and gas,” Ms. Palin said.

You're late. Ive been asking this for awhile. Where the hell are her transcripts. Now, I might not be an expert, but wouldn't there be a problem with transferring credits?

Just askin'.

Yes, anyone who's been to college knows that College A isn't going to be accepting College B's credits, and College C might not accept you at all for transferring so many times.

She needs to just go ahead and admit she got her college degree from DeVry or that school that has Sally Struthers in the commercial while the "degree" programs for the "school" scroll up on the screen.

She has no degree. I'm willing to bet real money on that. She was a pretty White girl- just who was going to ask to SEE her degree?

Nobody

Wasn't Michelle's senior thesis vetted? Is Michelle running for VP? Oh, that's right, she's Black and has to go under extra scrutiny.

rikyrah: TRANSFERRING CREDITS

ABSOLUTELY a problem!! But, it is obvious that that "WHITE GENE" smoothed that problem out! :>)

Obama-Biden '08!!

parker404: college degree. .
I've asked this same question. Did you notice that the MEDIA has NOT?? Guess 5 colleges in 6 years would lengthen the discussion. Annnnnd, her RAMBLING NON-ANSWERS are STR8 long enough!! :>)

Obama-Biden '08!!

McCain was on Fox @ 8:30 a.m.(ET) proposing this very idea.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/14110...

And yet a story was filed at 6:38 am saying that Obama had this very idea.

McCain gave Obama credit for this idea this on Morning Joe today.

Where, BTW Joe tried to claim it was Pelosi's fault for not getting the last few votes needed to pass the bill. He further argued that the the bill not passing was indicative of both McCain and Obama not having real leadership in their respective parties. He also placed some blame with Pelosi's speech Mika tried to interject but as usual she got no respect.

And McCain will copy this idea in 5...4...3...2...

BWA HA HA HA HA

Town: LOL! :>) I was headed in the same direction! XEROX came to mind! :>)

s must have changed something, 'cause I cain't see which NEGATIVE POINT we're on. I think it is NEGATIVE 200 something. :>)

Obama-Biden '08!!

hehee..

I just caught on to what you are talking about in your second point.

Texas_Girl: I need ta type slower. :>)

I do use that RATE DOWN ARROW when appropriate! :>)

This is just an anecdote, so take it for what it's worth:

I just got off a conference call with about a dozen people, and before the meeting got underway folks were talking about the bailout fiasco and the campaign. There was a lot of anger about how the bailout package was put together and the general consensus was that: McCain's stunt last week makes him look like a chump, and Palin is a complete moron who shouldn't be let loose anywhere near the White House.

What is interesting about this is all the other callers are white, middle-aged, conservative types from all over the country. I know for a fact that at least half this crowd were gung-ho Bush backers.

Like I said it's just an anecdote, but I'd thought I'd share.

White folks don't like people who mess with their money. Yes, I'm generalizing, but you and I both know it's true.

MsKitty: This is very ENCOURAGING!! Keep this message a-coming!! Thanks! :>)

Obama-Biden '08!!

The Sarah Palin pity party

Everyone seems to be oozing sympathy for the fumbling vice-presidential nominee. Please. Cry me a freaking river.

By Rebecca Traister

Is this the week that Democrats and Republicans join hands -- to heap pity on poor Sarah Palin? At the moment, all signs point to yes, as some strange bedfellows reveal that they have been feeling sorry for the vice-presidential candidate ever since she stopped speaking without the help of a teleprompter.

Sarah Palin is no wilting flower. She is a politician who took the national stage and sneered at the work of community activists. She boldly tries to pass off incuriosity and lassitude as regular-people qualities, thereby doing a disservice to all those Americans who also work two jobs and do not come from families that hand out passports and backpacking trips, yet still manage to pick up a paper and read about their government and seek out experience and knowledge.

When you stage a train wreck of this magnitude -- trying to pass one underqualified chick off as another highly qualified chick with the lame hope that no one will notice -- well, then, I don't feel bad for you.

When you treat women as your toys, as gullible and insensate pawns in your Big Fat Presidential Bid -- or in Palin's case, in your Big Fat Chance to Be the First Woman Vice President Thanks to All the Cracks Hillary Put in the Ceiling -- I don't feel bad for you.

When you don't take your own career and reputation seriously enough to pause before striding onto a national stage and lying about your record of opposing a Bridge to Nowhere or using your special-needs child to garner the support of Americans in need of healthcare reform you don't support, I don't feel bad for you.

When you don't have enough regard for your country or its politics to cram effectively for the test -- a test that helps determine whether or not you get to run that country and participate in its politics -- I don't feel bad for you.

http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2008/09/30/pal...

Val: Band-Aid, please! :>)

Ouch. She went off.

Part Two of "White Americans and the Politics of Race"

The Tipping Point
http://simplifythepositive.blogspot.com/2008/09...

EXCERPT:

The presidential campaign of Barack Obama, at its heart, has always been a calculated bet, a $500 million dollar gamble that enough racially ambivalent white Americans could see beyond tradition and precedent and measure Obama's candidacy in terms of the value it brings to the table instead of the history it makes.

Could they be wrong?

Brown Man: Goin' on my "Field Trip"! :>)

MARVINNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

okay, gotta go.

caligirl: Here's another one! ENJOY!! :>)

http://noolmusic.com/blogs/YouTube_Music_Videos...

thanks, greenlady... i needed that! :-)

caligirl: U R welcome! :>)

Oh, I hear ya on the economic backdrop of this election. But crazier stuff has transpired in American politics.

Remember when John Ashcroft LOST his 2000 Senate bid to Mel Carnahan...after Carnahan died??

I'm just sayin... Popcorn and tin foil time! LOL

New Obama Ad on The Economy

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/30/two-mi...

I'm feelin' your video posts, Rikyrah! Goooooooooooood stuff ;)

Also, that Fareed Zakaria piece calling for Sarah Palin to withdraw from the ticket should go over real nice with the NASCAR/ NHL crowd.

Uhm, good luck with THAT!

Denise: Hey! :>) Here it is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMDW0xVgewk&feat...
Fareed Zakaria on Palin 9/29/08

TRUTH!!! :>)

Obama-Biden '08!

Denise,

we still miss you and yogo over at SB.

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday—the first update with results based entirely upon interviews conducted following the first Presidential Debate--shows Barack Obama attracting 51% of the vote while John McCain earns 45%

rikyrah: Yaaaaaa! :>)


Obama-Biden '08!!!

Bad economy = Good for Obama/Dems

A few facts for you:

Number of additional votes needed to pass the bailout: 12

Number of Democrats on Barney Frank's committee who voted no: 12

Number of Democrats total who voted no on the plan: 95

Had Frank been able to control his committee or Pelosi the Democrats or had Barack Obama bothered to pick up the phone to support the plan he favored, it would have passed.

" Aides to Mr. Obama said he had not directly reached out to try to sway any House Democrats who opposed the measure."

There is nothing more to say about the failure of Congress to pass the 'rescue' or 'bailout' bill yesterday. Dems want to pin economic collapse on the Republicans for political purposes. They engineered a defeat of the bill by refusing to whip up the necessary Democrat votes, while demanding that the Republicans deliver 100 votes.

Dems negotiated at the outset without House Republicans. Paulson asked McCain to come to DC. He did, got the Republicans a seat at the table and turned 4 ayes into 64 ayes.

Then Obama and Pelosi allowed the bill to fail because they feel that it is to their political benefit. The MSM will gladly spread the news that this is all the Republicans fault.

Obama will keep his powder dry until election day, and continue to let Congress and the MSM run with this narrative.

Forget the CRA. Forget ACORN. Forget Dodd, Frank, Johnson, Raines, Gorelick, Mudd and the CBC.

Can someone on this blog tell me why Obama was Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's favorite Senator?

Can someone explain to me why Obama is the top fundraiser on Wall Street?

Did you know that Warren Buffet, one of Obama's go-to economic advisors, just invested 5 BILLION in Goldman-Sachs?

Did you now that Goldman-Sachs employees are among Obama's top donors?

Did you know that Hank Paulson, a Democrat, is the former CEO of Goldman-Sachs?

Did you know that Goldman-Sachs will be one of the few financial institutions to survive this current crisis?

Obama, the Dems, and Obama's 'Wall Street Fat Cats' are 'all in' and betting big that economic disaster will benefit them.

Obama is for this bailout. The Dems want to pass a bill all on their own, and they want the credit, while being able to lay all the blame at the feet of the Republicans.

Taxpayers will soon be left holding the check for all the bad loans fostered by the CRA and ACORN, gobbled up by Democrat controlled Fannie and Freddie, and spread throughout the global financial system. The new bill will provide foreclosure protection, allowing all homeowners to keep their homes, no matter how bad a risk they are.

"Affordable Housing for all Americans" has been the dream of Democrats since the Carter Administration and you and I will now pay for each and every home in America that cannot be paid for by the occupants.

Well, first of all let us take a look at President George W. Bush's aggressive
"America's Homeownership Challenge" since so many of you Rethugs want to perpetuate these talking points by pushing off blame on minorites while ignoring the risky business behavior of financial institutions, some that have been in business for more than 150+ years. I will not stand by and let people like you pass thies shit off on the CRA which was enacted in 1977(how ludicrous) and blame it on today's crisis and you should be ashamed for doing so.

A White House press release from 6/17/2002 on President Bush's "America's Homeownership Challenge"

Today, President Bush announced a new goal to help increase the number of minority homeowners by at least 5.5 million before the end of the decade. The President's aggressive housing agenda will help dismantle the barriers to homeownership by providing down payment assistance, increasing the supply of affordable homes, increasing support for self-help homeownership programs, and simplifying the home buying process & increasing education. The President also issued "America's Homeownership Challenge" to the real estate and mortgage finance industries to join in his effort to increase the number of minority homeowners by taking concrete steps to tear down the barriers to homeownership that face minority families.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/06...

--------------------------------------------------------
And then in 2004 President Bush further touting his plans for this aggressive Homeownership initiative with the following press release in March of that year.

Background on The President's Homeownership Initiative

President Bush is making a difference in the lives of American home buyers. The President's aggressive housing agenda includes providing down payment assistance through the American Dream Downpayment Initiative; increasing the supply of affordable homes through the Single-Family Affordable Housing Tax Credit; making a difference in the lives of low-income homebuyers with the Zero-Downpayment Initiative; and increasing home-buying education and counseling. President Bush also issued America's Homeownership Challenge to the real estate and mortgage finance industries to encourage them to join the effort to close the gap that exists between the homeownership rates of minorities and non-minorities.

President Bush signed the American Dream Downpayment Act into law in December 2003. This fund will help approximately 40,000 families a year with their down payment and closing costs and is set to begin helping families early this spring.
Since 2001, President Bush has doubled the funding for housing counseling for families.
President Bush proposed the Zero-Downpayment Initiative for Federal Housing Administration (FHA)-insured single-family mortgages for first-time homebuyers in his FY 2005 budget. FHA projections indicate that this new mortgage product would generate about 150,000 new homeowners in the first year alone.
Through America's Homeownership Challenge, more than 2 dozen companies have made commitments to increase minority homeownership, including pledges to provide more than $1.1 trillion in mortgage purchases for minority homebuyers this decade.
President Bush's FY 2005 budget supports dismantling the barriers to homeownership by:
Requesting $200 million for the American Dream Downpayment Initiative -- making a difference in the lives of low-income homebuyers.
Providing $2.5 billion over five years to enact a permanent single-family housing tax credit to increase the supply of affordable single-family homes.
Providing $45 million for housing counseling to support agencies counseling families on home-buying -- more than double the amount since 2001.
Supporting rural homeownership through the Department of Agriculture with $2.7 billion in home loan guarantees for low- to moderate-income rural residents and $1.1 billion in direct loans for very low to low-income borrowers who are unable to secure a mortgage through a conventional lender. These loans are expected to provide 42,800 homeownership opportunities to rural families across America.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/nes/releases/2004/03/...

Make sure you note that George W. Bush PUSHED FOR $1.1 BILLION in direct loans for very low to low-income borrowers who could not get conventional loans---which of course opened the doorway to subprime mortgages and his Zero-down payment initiative.

And when lawmakers and attorney generals became worried about the pervasive use of sub-prime mortgages, George W.Bush stood by and turned a blind eye and allowed a federal agency, the OCC to trump state laws from putting an end to this risky and dangerous lending practice.


Former New York Governor and Attorney General Eliot Spitzer wrote about it earler this year in the Wahington Post.


....Predatory lending was widely understood to present a looming national crisis. This threat was so clear that as New York attorney general, I joined with colleagues in the other 49 states in attempting to fill the void left by the federal government. Individually, and together, state attorneys general of both parties brought litigation or entered into settlements with many subprime lenders that were engaged in predatory lending practices. Several state legislatures, including New York's, enacted laws aimed at curbing such practices.

What did the Bush administration do in response? Did it reverse course and decide to take action to halt this burgeoning scourge? As Americans are now painfully aware, with hundreds of thousands of homeowners facing foreclosure and our markets reeling, the answer is a resounding no.

Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye.

Let me explain: The administration accomplished this feat through an obscure federal agency called the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). The OCC has been in existence since the Civil War. Its mission is to ensure the fiscal soundness of national banks. For 140 years, the OCC examined the books of national banks to make sure they were balanced, an important but uncontroversial function. But a few years ago, for the first time in its history, the OCC was used as a tool against consumers.

In 2003, during the height of the predatory lending crisis, the OCC invoked a clause from the 1863 National Bank Act to issue formal opinions preempting all state predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative. The OCC also promulgated new rules that prevented states from enforcing any of their own consumer protection laws against national banks. The federal government's actions were so egregious and so unprecedented that all 50 state attorneys general, and all 50 state banking superintendents, actively fought the new rules.

But the unanimous opposition of the 50 states did not deter, or even slow, the Bush administration in its goal of protecting the banks. In fact, when my office opened an investigation of possible discrimination in mortgage lending by a number of banks, the OCC filed a federal lawsuit to stop the investigation.

http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/articl...
--------------------------------------------------
So please do not insult the intelligence of JJP readers with these lame ass Republican underlying racist talking points. There is no way the Carter Administration, CRA or ACORN is even tied to this mess. You might want to start researching Phil Gramm, Enron loophole, Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and then maybe you will be able to have an intelligent conversation on this---because right now that is nonsense. But of course, Republicans almost never take responsibility for their actions--look at what happened yesterday.

Pelosi and the Dems to have all Dems vote for an unpopular bill to clean up a Republican mess. The Repubs thought the Dems would vote for the bill so they can demagogue against the Dems.

I agree with Micheline.

Republicans -- including very notably John McCain as well as these other ones under discussion here -- are clearly displaying severe irresponsibility and immaturity.

They want the other party to clean up their mess. They don't take responsibility for their own party's actions. It's always someone else's fault, never theirs.

It's like John McCain saying that he acted as he did in the campaign because Senator Obama didn't have town hall meetings. Or the silliness at the RNC about how the Democrats caused all the problems since they have had a majoritu in congress since not very much time ago (but the 8 years of Bush and the Repub majority -- nah, attending to that would mean being grown people taking real responsibility, and they can't have that)

I say: if you can't step up and be grown up and take responsibility for what you and your party have done, then you don't deserve any sort of leadership position at all. At ALL.

The Repubs thought that Pelosi and company were stupid enough to have all Dems vote for an unpopular bill to clean up a Republican mess. The Repubs thought the Dems would vote for the bill so they can turn around trashing the bailout and tying it to the Dems AND Bush. Pelosi did good.

Exactly. I, like many others have been suspicious of the timing of this anyway. Newt Gingrich on last Tuesday proclaimed that whoever voted for this bill (Obama of McCain) would be the loser in November.
On Politico they wrote about it:
.....Newt Gingrich says Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson’s plan to bail out Wall Street is “a really bad idea” that, come Election Day, will “break against anyone who votes for it.”

At a press conference Tuesday (Sept 23), Gingrich said the bailout proposal is a “watershed event” that puts the credibility of the GOP presidential nominee on the line. If McCain plays the maverick card, Gingrich said, the bailout will become the “Obama-Bush plan.”

If, however, the plan is enacted, then, in addition to being a “dead loser” on Nov. 4, it will damage its congressional proponents even more severely in 2010 -- once Americans see it as “the kind of corrupt scheme that could have been designed by [Russian prime minister] Vladimir Putin,” Gingrich said.

----But then Newt Gingrich appeared to have dropped his opposition to the bailout plan on yesterday:

ABC reported on yesterday:
ABC News' Teddy Davis Reports: Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich reversed course on Monday, issuing a statement saying that if he were still in office he would "reluctantly and sadly" support the $700 billion Wall Street bailout bill.

Gingrich, who led the charge against the bailout last week, explained his change in position by saying that the House Republicans, "reinforced by John McCain," have improved the bill "significantly" so it is "less bad" than the original proposal offered by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.

While saying that he sympathizes with any member of Congress who votes "no," Gingrich says in his statement that the crisis of the credit markets is real and could have "horrendous" consequences.

While Gingrich has come around on the bailout bill, he still wants Paulson to resign for initially requesting the $700 billion with no oversight.

Gingrich maintains that as long as Paulson is in charge, "it is impossible to get a creative or significantly better solution."

"Having a former chairman of Goldman Sachs preside over disbursing hundreds of billions of dollars to Wall Street is a terrible concept and inevitably will lead to crony capitalism and the appearance of - if not the actual existence of - corruption," says Gingrich in his statement. "The Bush Administration has now provided three case studies in arrogance, isolation, and destructiveness: Michael Brown during Hurricane Katrina, Ambassador Jerry Bremer in Baghdad, and Secretary Paulson at Treasury."

"It is a tragic and very expensive legacy," he continued. "No conservative and no Republican should doubt how much it has hurt our cause and our party."
------------------------------------------
And today on MSNBC, Andrea Mitchell reported that Newt Gingrich was influencing Republicans to vote against it---even though he had issued a statement saying he supported it.

MITCHELL: I’m told reliably by leading Republicans who are close to him, he was whipping against this up until the last minute when he issued that face-saving statement. Newt Gingrich was telling people in the strongest possible language that this was a terrible deal, not only that it was a terrible deal, that it was a disaster, it was the end of democracy as we know it, it was socialism. And then at the last minute comes out with a statement when the vote is already in place.

This legislation has been set up to be as a trap for Obama and Democrats to turn the American citizens against them for this unpopular plan---and they are hoping it will cot Obama the election. That is why even on yesterday, before the bill failed, John McCain kept saying he "hopes" he can vote for it on Wednesday----McCain would never clearly show his support for the bill-----because he does not plan on supporting it. These Rethugs can not be trusted.

The lame duck couldn't get his posse to back the bill because big ol' bad Nancy Pelosi hurt their widdle feelings!
Poor babies!
WAHHHHHHHHHHH!

Admiral: LOL! :>)

I found a piece on the "LAME DUCK!" I was really looking for a cartoon. I'll continue looking. :>)

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/sunday/comm...
Commentary by Greenberg: Lame duck -Bush

Here are some cartoons:

http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/direct...

http://www.cartoonstock.com/directory/l/lame_du...

O.K. I'm tha-rough! :>)

It's over. Michelle can start measuring for draperies.

A clean sweep. House, Senate, White House!

Don't even joke!! That's the exact issue that Deval was politically assassinated on here in MA -- draperies. The Establishment was ready on day one to take down the upstart. And then a stupid controversy over draperies.

Anderkoo: It's Oooooo. K. They're NOT related concepts! Whew! :>)

Just keep thinking:

Obama-Biden '08!!

Just as long as the drapes don't look like that dress she had on at the debate.

RAOTFLMAO

AGREED Town. LOL

Oh and let me just add, whoever advised her to wear stripes around her ass needs to be fired. Those stripes made her hips look super wide. Not a good look.

No sistah should ever wear horizontal stripes.....I don't care what the sales lady says...I don't care if your girlfriend shopping with you says you look good in that (believe me, she's hatin), I don't care if you think you're a size 6 - NO HORIZONTAL STRIPES! EVER!

Or maybe she had the drapes cut down into a dress, a la Scarlett O'Hara. At any rate, don't do that again.

***Video*** Is FOX trying to do a tough interview?...
Senator McCain will you re-suspend your campaign?
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=c9f-o9LTLfA

From a DailyKos diary:

Actually, there are two newsworthy items from Morning Joe today.

James Clyburn, who is the House Democratic whip, told Joe in no uncertain terms how the Republicans failed in yesterday's bailout vote. In the days leading to the vote, there was an arrangement for Democrats to supply 118 votes and for Republicans to bring in 100 votes. In the hours leading to the vote Clyburn approached Republican whip Roy Blunt to compare notes. Blunt told Clyburn he didn't have 100 votes, but could get into the high 70's. Clyburn told Blunt that would work because the Democrats would give them a cushion. The Democrats came through, with more than their share of the bargain, but the Republicans failed.


The other news from Morning Joe this morning is Andrea Mitchell reporting that Newt Gingrich was lobbying Republicans all morning to vote against the bailout, calling it a political loser. Yet when it became clear that the bill would fail, Gingrich issued a statement claiming he would have voted for the bailout.

The crew on Morning Joe is convinced that this is the opening gambit from Gingrich for a Presidential run in 2012. They also think Gingrich really jobbed Rep. Boehner on this. I can't help but speculate that Gingrich already thinks Obama has won this election, or he wouldn't be sticking his nose into events trying to get a leg up on a 2012 run against (an incumbent) McCain in the Republican primaries.

Gingrich clearly thought the bailout would pass thanks to Democratic votes, and that Republicans would be able to bash them for it in November and future elections, (just like the 1993 budget vote). When it became clear that Democrats weren't going to fall on their political swords to pass a Republican bill which most of the public hated, and that truth started a market meltdown, Gingrich issued the statement that he would have voted for the bill.



http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/30/75423/1...

...just one thing...they think McCain will run in 2012?? He'll be 76!! I think this election is his last chance. I can't see him running again...certainly not with his age and health problems, and he's devalued his "war hero" capital in this election. I suppose that's the gambler putting it all on the line.

I remember there being talk of him possibly making a deal to only serve one term.

parker404: Me 2.

Why Sarah Palin won't drop out of the McCain / Palin ticket unless forced to (by Todd or McCain himself):

1) If she leaves the ticket, all the McCain provided lawyers leave, too. She and Todd going to have to deal with Troopergate and all the other questions (yahoo accounts, $25K gifts, charging the state to stay at her own house, etc.) all by herself.

2) The people of Alaska aren't too happy with her because when they try to call state government, they get the McCain campaign. Alaskans aren't too happy with having their state hijacked.

3) Her and Todd's shadiness is coming to light. People want to know why is Todd getting all these perks and priviledges but he was not elected to any office and is not a state employee?


They might be setting the stage for Palin to exit, but it won't be her choice to exit, it will be McCain putting her off the ticket, but they can't make it seem like McCain is the one putting her off the ticket (this is where Todd wanting her to be home more comes in).


However, it wouldn't be too smart for McCain to put her off the ticket because wouldn't the Republicans have to vote on the new VP nominee? And if they are voting for a new VP nominee, that opens it up wide for somebody to suggest replacing McCain as the nominee as well. Although I would think most Republicans who want a career in politics would let McCain go down as the sacrificial old guy and start fresh for 2012.

Town,

you are on the money.

I would think that keeping Palin on the ticket would be to the Dems advantage.

If conventional wisdom is correct, she may motivate the base but she repels independents and Republican elites, Dems loathe her with the red, hot, fire of a thousand suns and will motivate every liberal activist suffering from 'Palin Derangement Syndrome' to 'scare out the vote.'

I had thought about #1, but you're right - all the "benefits" of the Republican machinery will leave Palin even more vulnerable if (or when?) she leaves the ticket.

The truth is, if McCain, Todd, or anyone boots Palin off/convinces her to leave the ticket, the race is over.

The GOP had a problem with the major suspects (Romney-Mormon, Huckabee/Thompson have conservative credentials that would outshine the nominee's), and damn if they'd try another science project again.

Plus, you're right; they'd have to vote on the new nominee. Would you want to essentially go to another convention? Not to mention, who pays for it?

McCain's pretty much stuck at this point. Maybe Palin will surprise in the debate.

If McCain thought booting Palin would win him the White House, McCain is just that stupid and ambitious enough to try it.

The only people who would offer themselves up as replacement VPs would be the ambitious but stupid like Guiliani. Or guys who figure this is their last shot, like Thompson.

The GOP has thrown Bush under the bus so many times the dude has permanent tire tracks and now they are throwing McCain under the bus as well.

And rikyrah has posted a link that says Gingrich is making noise about running in 2012.

John McCain is in a lot of trouble, my friends.

Yeah, it's really hard for me to believe they could recover after that. What would it say to his supporters about McCain's judgment and experience if he has to reverse his first major decision?

Plus really, who in their right mind would accept the nomination at this point?

I doubt very much it would take another convention to select a new VP candidate.

Per the party rules, the GOP could reconvene to nominate someone else. Would probably be a major headache, and would pretty much kill any remaining enthusiasm (as well as any remaning positive public perception).

If republicans cared about country they should right now renominate someone who is qualified.As long as Palin is on the ticket then do not claim that Country comes first.

Too late.
They are stuck with Caribou Barbie.

But, the sad and scary thing is, if McCain thinks it will get him the White House, he is desperate enough and ambitious enough to do it.

After this campaign season, would anyone really be surprised if this ever happened?

Don't think so, cause like you said....that'd put his nomination in serious jepoardy as well. Palin got him through the convention. Take her away, and.......

*** Video****

http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1831461

I should have known someone would do this.

***Video***
Why do people laugh at creationists? (part 26) Sarah Palin
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=ntEE9Zy-qQQ

did you guys see that couric interview with mccain/palin? that shit was awkward. he looked and acted liker her dad not her partner. they have no chemistry they dont get along and its obvious. hes spent more time defending his pick that supporting it. he cut her off three times like a dad would do a daughter when she doesnt know the answer to an obvious question. people keep saying let her be herself well hell herself might be worse than the pumped full of information person she is now

OK, this just feeds my issues with the electorate looking at the Presidency as some kind of surrogate parent, but when I look at the videos of Barack and Joe together (like the one in the rain in Fredericksburg from last week), Joe looks like he really admires/respects Barack as the head of the ticket; both look like they actually like each other; and Joe seems to be really happy to be on stage in the literal and figurative sense.

ITA. Biden even called Obama "boss" during their 60 Minutes interview.

***Video***
SARAH PALIN UTTERLY UNQUALIFIED! Fareed Zakaria
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=yOmdemilbLI

TruthSeeker: I missed this and posted it. SORRY!

My bad!


Obama-Biden '08!!

he has been truthtelling

"This is not a game." Someone please tell John McCain this.

Fareed was great! He was beside himself with the insanity of it all. Fareed and Jack are the only ones telling the truth...and sometimes Jeff Toobin.

TruthSeeker: True dat!! Annnnnd, IFF Jack and Wolfe are in the same room, "Blitzen" must know that Jack is ready ta "go off" on him - physically!! :>)

It sounds as if nobody, & I mean nobody, outside of that tight band of certain elected officials, actually had full information of what the damn Bailout entailed. If so, they had to have known for a hell of a long time. Why then did this all of a sudden become so urgent? And if it was such a serious issue, why could Treasury only come up with a 2.5 page report? Middle School size paper to deal with an economic disaster! Damn! Are they totally lacking in "serious?"

Why, then, didn't anyone in Congress demand full disclosure? If someone is lending/pissing away your money don't you ask questions? The devil's in the details. I think that's the crux of how this whole issue was handled. The electorate is no longer going to take double-speak, bs, etc. from the elected officials. That party(s) is over! How many mess-ups do we have to witness & experience before we say "enough?" This Katrina Economy is the camel that broke everyone's (D, R, I) back (finally, Katrina, I guess, wasn't good enough for these idiots to learn a lesson, neither was Rita or Ike or the bridge in MN), we had to go all the way. Lessons not learned. Basically with regard to all elected officials, it's: YOUR WORD IS WORTHLESS! So, heck no, full disclosure. See that's the price of losing credibility & governance.

Ordinary people who have been carrying the tax burden for so long wonder why their elected officials waited until now to turn around and say "You know, we want your poor middle class hard working ass to give more. I know, I know, but hang in there because one day you'll be, if you work so damn hard, you'll reach that top 2.5% of those who'll never be taxed." And those 2.5% brought us the gang of incompetence. That's the American Dream. No picket fence. Sorry to bust the Santa.

With regard to the ordinary person, it's about being shafted for over 8 years recently & 20+ year in total oblivion. I believe the electorate is finally awakening. And nobody has successfully explained the conundrum of taxpayers bailing these fat cats out and how it would be reciprocated. Yes, I get the global financial instrument's connectvity. That's been there, where was regulation? In the Caymans? We, the middle income tax payers, have been, after all, paying the tax burden. I mean, someone entered our (metaphorically speaking) homes and took the silver, the furniture, scholarships for our kids, made you get at least 3 jobs just to stay afloat and feed/clothe your children; and the thieves were there in your fridge, drinking from the last of your OJ carton and they turned around from that fridge, shut the door and said "Sorry, ma'am, it's the robber man." And you shied away because you were trying to hold on to the tidbit the !@#$%$ left on the counter. And we were so grateful for that crumb.

That's why ordinary people are pissed. Forget the politicians, who postured today, we were just a convenient prop ... for today.

So sorry to just let out. But I've just about had enough of this apathy and I'm so damn worried that we'll all not collectively get out there and VOTE! Please vote.

Not sure if people saw the information about Sunday night's Treasury phone call with financial instituations, where they basically reassured the banks that the limitations on executive compensation in the Paulson bill were a farce, and that they weren't actually going to act for a couple of weeks anyhow. What a sham.

The vote yesterday is encouraging ... still, there's a long way to go to get this right.

No blank check for Wall Street!

it seems to me like the proposers of this deal were/are irresponsible. That original proposal was garbage. after they freighten Americans half to death with certain economic death they back away. they started the fire and went across the street to watch it burn. i try not to be a conspiracy theorists but i really wonder how much of whats going on is preventable and what theyre setting up for bush's grand exit.

Bu$h&Co know Obama will likely win so they are trying to destroy the country to leave him a nice shit pile as a going away present.

Not 'conspiracy theory'. You should be concerned. If the last 8 yrs have taught us anything, it is that you should be very concerned with what the rich & powerful are doing behind closed doors. White folks call it 'connecting-the-dots' or follow-the-money (or paper)-trail when they do it.

Conspiracy Nuts are on the accendency- they are now called Progressives. Things we have been saying in our communities- in barber/beauty shops, church, street corners, at breakfast, lunch & dinner- for many, many years. They are just putting a non-Black face on the very same concerns.

Randy Rhodes thinks that there may be a power grab before Nov 4th by Bush/Cheney and Co using the military to take tyrrant-like control of our republic (something Uncle Sam has never had trouble doing in our neighborhoods). Before Bush/Cheney came to power this would have been dismissed as silly tinfoil-hat stuff. Now, not so much.

Thank on it...

Black Mike

Obama makes Keith Olbermann's worst person in the world list!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/29/obama-...

And its well deserved too!.......LOL

I saw this, too. Really funny. I actually thought it was endearing - evidence that they can still poke fun at each other in the midst of all this craziness...

That cracked me up. Even Barack isn't above being in the doghouse every once in a while.

I saw that! Oops Barack! lol

i saw that last night; poor barack doesn't know whether he is coming or going. glad he is on the road, michelle looks like she doesn't play. their lives won't be the same ever again

Bullet or the Ballet

Malcolm X gave that BRILLIANT speech in 1964. 1964!

Very little had changed up until Mr Obama came on the scene. Wow... It took 44 years for us to get together behind a candidate. Exercising our substantial political muscle.

I could not be prouder of my people.

Black Mike

Amidst all the paranoia and chaos, thanks notably to news from the financial sector, a little mental vacation can do some good: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5b2CSh3Yds

rikyrah: Speaking with "forked tongue" - directly from his "forked BRAIN":

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/29/mccain...
McCain's Mixed Messages

At 5:15 p.m Monday evening, Sen. John McCain addressed a pool of reporters in Ohio, declaring that it was not the appropriate time or place for people to cast blame on Congress' failure to pass an economic bailout package.

"Now is not the time to affix the blame. It's time to fix the problem. I would hope that all our leaders, all of them, can put aside short-term political goals and do what's in the best interests of the American people."

It was an utter farce of a call for political level-headedness. The very sentence before McCain uttered those words, he lambasted "Senator Obama and his allies in Congress" for infusing "unnecessary partisanship into the process."

He is so C-O-N-F-U-S-E-D!! :>)

Obama-Biden '08!!

Goodnight!! :>)

rikyrah: Errbody's getting into the "pic action!" 'cause Mr. Obama/Mrs. Obama & the Bidens be "LOOKIN' GOOD!" :>)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/28/presid...
From HuffPost: Presidential Race Photos

ENJOY!! :>)


Obama-Biden '08!

P.S/ There are pics of "McAncient"/The gov. 2.

Love these pictures!

claudia_m: Hey! :>) They are GREAT!! I'm glad that more people/especially the media are getting into the "up close and personal" pic business! :>)

Obama-Biden '08!!!

No offense meant to anyone, but I am tired of seeing blonde trophy-wives in politics. I know, that probably includes Jill Biden, but I'm so ready for a change. Petty, I know. (Not intended as racist!)

Anderkoo: . . but I am tired of seeing blonde trophy-wives. . .

I'm thinking that I have BEEN TIRED [all my life] of seeing that the PERFECT female[and male] image is "blonde hair, blue eyes, and white skin."

Hence, most tv ads don't relate to me. So I guess I shouldn't buy "Happy Meals" until late at night, 'cause "we" hadn't been in those ads during the day!

What margarine should I EAT? 'cause I'm not in the ad which tells me that "Everything's Better With Blue Bonnet On it."

In fact, when I was a child, I thought that there must be a section in the grocery store for "US", 'cause back-in-the-day, "WE" were in NO ADS!! And, SURELY we cain't eat/wear "THEIR" STUFF! There were STILL SIGNS that said COLORED and WHITE [this and that]

http://www.superstock.com/imagepreview/results....

To your statement: Not intended as racist. NOT petty. Reality! IMHO.

Obama-Biden '08!!

My own gripe: when was the last time you saw a lead male Asian character who's not (a) a non-speaking action hero, or (b) a comic-relief nerd?

I'm glad that today, the only place I see "colored" and "white" segregation is on our washing machine.

Last time? I can't say I ever recall to tell you the truth.

Speaking of Asians, I have wondered why this specific group is not discussed in MSM as it relates to the election. Do Asians as a voting block generally align with Whites (I have never seen data on it)? Or perhaps, is it because of the many sub-cultures that it is too complicated for the MSM to dissect.

As far as ethnic groups, you generally only hear about, Blacks, Hispanics, Jews, and European ethnic groups like the Irish (but only in terms of "hard working white ethnics". The only time you hear about Arab brothers and sisters are in a negatice light.

Asians aren't a big enough voting block to follow that closely for the generals. Our highest concentrations are in "safe" states (for either party) like NY, CA, IL, TX, WA. Asians did matter more in the primaries, when they seemed to be Hillary-leaning (but that was very generational).

This is kind of stupid, but it's a heck of a lot easier to pronounce "Obama" than "McCain," "Clinton," or "Bush" if your first language is Asian.

I did not realize there was a high concentration of Asians in Texas. I can understand the generational gap, but I guess that cuts across many cultures.


Excuse my typos in the previous post. I am trying hard to check in here every once in awhile. Trying to keep my job.

Anderkoo:

1. Good point!

2. The "SIGNS" are down BUT NOT THE SEGREGATION, in many cases. You jes ain't gettin' that promotion! You jes ain't gettin' that job! You jes cain't rent that appartment or buy that house - HERE! I'll stop here!

LOL! On the washing machine! :>)

Obama-Biden '08!!

rIkyrah: Yaaaaaaa!

FIRED UP! READY TO GO!!!!

rikyrah: This video has poignant images as it demonstrates - What's Going On!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4V70Fk_SDG4
Marvin Gaye

It should be updated. We are in a SAD state of affairs!

Obama-Biden '08!!

I love Marvin's rendition of the National Anthem...classic

Obama is up in a second poll in NORTH CAROLINA.

rikyrah: Yaaaaa!:>)

NC is ours. Liddy Dole is running scared. I love it!