McCain wants to delay fridays Debate. Why?

DonaldM_23 · Sep 25, 2008, 08:16 AM

During the week Sen John McCain state that he wants to cancel fridays debate to tackle our country economic crisis. Barak Obama response was; The next president needs to "deal with more than one thing at once." Do you think that due to McCain lack of experience and a poor econmic plan is the reason he's looking to delay friday's debate. Is this a political stunt to show the nation that McCain priority and strength is the ecomony. As the next president we need to hear each canadates outlook during the debate to know how the econmic crisis will be handle. let me hear you america lol

excon · Sep 26, 2008, 08:58 AM

Hello again, tom:

Ahhh, I see. It's CBS's fault. What??? McCain doesn't decide what interview to do??? I figured you'd LIKE a president who's in charge. Guess not.

Next. You say Couric dissed Palin, when what she did was expose her. Uhhhh, that's her job, no??? Unless you think the job of the press is to lob softballs, like Hannity did.

Besides, IF it WAS a diss, it was a diss on McCain for picking such a dufus.

Finally, I don't think Obama starred here either.

excon

Wondergirl · Sep 26, 2008, 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

Since you are willing to go so far back into history

McCain keeps taking us back to Vietnam and his POW years.

Quote:

Wondergirl.

McCain suspended his campaign when Tres.Sec Paulson appealed to him to come to Washington.

McCain threw over the Letterman show with the excuse that he was on his way to bail out the bailout gang, then appeared on Couric's show that same evening, hung around NYC the rest of the night, didn't show up in Washington until the next morning, proceeded to be totally ineffective and even caused upset by bringing his "suspended" campaign into the bailout meeting.

What a guy!

Wondergirl · Sep 26, 2008, 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

2) By suspending his campaign

The thing is, he didn't. TV ads were still being run, money was still being collected, and his eventual presence at the bailout meeting the NEXT DAY was too little, too late.

Wondergirl · Sep 26, 2008, 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

the revelation that Couric intentionally dissed GOVERNOR Palin ?

You must not have watched that interview. Couric was totally nonplussed at the bizarre answers Palin was giving. Couric didn't diss her; she dissed herself.

speechlesstx · Sep 26, 2008, 09:41 AM

Powerline has posted a terrific take on this, much of which tom has already pointed out:

Quote:

McCain leads, Obama follows

The neat thing about a presidential race between two Senators is that voters can make direct comparisons between the candidates that otherwise are not possible. This year, the comparisons work in John McCain's favor.

McCain pushed for the "surge" in Iraq. Obama opposed it, saying it wouldn't work. When it worked, Obama said he knew it would work, but defended his vote anyway.

Two years ago, McCain warned that Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac were in serious need of reform and he so-sponsored legislation to reform it. Obama did not support this legislation, which the Democrats blocked. Obama was near the top of the list of recipients of contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac, and two executives from these outfits were among his campaign advisors.

McCain also had the right line on the Russian invasion of Georgia (though this was not a legislative issue). As Rudy Giuliani recounted at the Republican Convention, Obama waffled for a while and eventually adopted McCain's view. McCain led; Obama followed

Most recently, McCain figured out that he needed to get back to Washington to engage, and if possible provide leadership in, the momentous issue of the financial sector bailout. While McCain opted to help make something happen, Obama said he could be reached by phone if anything did happen.

Obama's position was untenable, so he eventually followed McCain back to Washington.

Hoping to cover for their "follower" of a presidential candidate, Democrats are claiming that McCain has done more harm than good in the legislative debate. Although this is always a possibility with McCain (and, indeed, just about anyone who is willing to lead), the Democrats' case is absurd.

Their argument is that Congress was on the verge of a deal until McCain entered the picture and caused Republican House members to block it. The problems with this script are several. First, there is no evidence that House Republicans were ever on board with any deal. Second, the support of House Republicans is not needed to pass bailout legislation. The Democrats control the House.

The Democrats counter the second point by saying that a majority of House Dems won't support a deal unless House Republicans provide "cover." But this argument raises more problems than it addresses. First, it is a serious condemnation of House Dems (too gutless to do what they think is right, even in the face of a potential economic meltdown). Second it is a serious condemnation of Nancy Pelosi (too ineffective to whip her troops into line even in the face of a potential economic meltdown). Third, it casts serious doubt on the wisdom of the deal that McCain is falsely accused of scuttling. If the deal made sense, House Dems wouldn't believe they need "cover" from House Republicans.

Fourth, the "cover" argument shows what a non-factor Obama is in all of this. The Dems complain (preposterously) that McCain has riled up House Republicans or failed to bring them around. Meanwhile, no one seems to be asking why Obama hasn't helped the House leadership obtain sufficient support from House Dems.

There's a reason why this question isn't being asked. Obama is lightweight from whom leadership is not, and should not, be expected.

This whole episode should be very revealing to the voters. The Dems are feckless and gutless, they want to control the House, Senate and White House but in a time of crisis don't want to take sole responsibility for a solution - they want Republican cover for something they claim has to be done now.

McCain, whether it was a stunt or not, did the right thing by returning to Washington and inviting Obama to come along. Obama wants to "appear" presidential but doesn't want to get his hands dirty this close to the election - I'm sure he's spent way too much time scripting his debate and can't afford to be distracted.

After yesterday's meetings, the Dems are basically saying it must be McCain's because he's here, while McCain should be asking "where's a good community organizer when you need one?"

Meanwhile, the blogosphere is worrying about witch hunters and the end of America as we know it if Palin is VP, and leftist groups are running a sick ad that tell us the reason we shouldn't vote for McCain is because he's had cancer, while the Obama campaign is threatening the media for running ads he doesn't like.

I think if that's the best people can do to derail McCain, it's his fault because he's here, the witch trials will begin soon, the end of America is at hand thanks to a VP and horror of horrors, McCain has had skin cancer, then some people really need to get a grip on reality. I'm sure I could find you a good therapist.

tomder55 · Sep 26, 2008, 09:44 AM

Wondergirl
I wasn't talking about that. Couric made an executive decision and ordered her staff to purge the use of the honorific title "Governor " in any CBS report or in her interview . She gave the courtesy to Biden but not to Palin .Just look at the trascript provided by CBS News and you'll see I'm right. This link provides both .
Couric & Co: CBS News Blogs and Editorial Forum - CBSNews.com

What Letterman did was use unreleased footage of McCain having makeup applied in prep for the Couric interview to make a cheap joke. McCain did not do his show because he was on his way to Washington and did not think it appropriate to yuck it up on late night comedy shows.

Wondergirl · Sep 26, 2008, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

McCain did not do his show because he was on his way to Washington and did not think it appropriate to yuck it up on late night comedy shows.

McCain wasn't anywhere close to leaving for Washington. He DUMPED Letterman. He left NYC for Washington the NEXT MORNING.

Quote:

late night comedy shows

Letterman is TAPED at 5:30 p.m. Mon-Thurs.

tomder55 · Sep 26, 2008, 10:18 AM

fine by me. he gets kudos for that. Letterman is only filling in until ConanO'Brian is ready.

spitvenom · Sep 26, 2008, 10:28 AM

Tom, Conan is taking over The Tonight Show at the end of 09 for Leno.

tomder55 · Sep 26, 2008, 10:30 AM

oops to me they are interchangable . Only watch Jon Stewart and Colbert anyway.



At Ask Me Help Desk you can ask questions in any topic and have them answered for free by our experts. To ask questions or participate in answering them you must register for a free account. By registering you will be able to: Get free answers from experts in any of our 300+ topics. Accept money for answers that you provide. Communicate privately with other members (PM). See fewer ads. Sign Up!