# Has this ever happened to you?



## jackmccullough (May 10, 2006)

Maybe you're in school and you have a test coming up that you're not ready for, or maybe you have a big presentation at work, or maybe you're a lawyer and you know that you're not ready for the trial you have coming up. Whatever it is, you just want the thing to go away, and you start racking your brain trying to figure out an excuse to just skip it. Maybe you call in sick, or maybe you can conjure up a traffic jam that prevents you from getting there.

Of course, if you're running for president, how about just telling everybody you're not going to show up?

So is there anyone here who really, seriously believes that McCain wants to duck--oops, cancel--the debate because his presence in Washington is so essential to coming up with a resolution to the financial crisis that he just can't afford the time away?


----------



## young guy (Jan 6, 2005)

Maybe Obama is right, shouldn't presidents or potential presidents be able to do more than one thing at a time?


----------



## Terpoxon (Sep 28, 2006)

https://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/09/bill-clinton-do.html

Bill Clinton believed him:

We know he didn't do it because he's afraid because Sen. McCain wanted more debates," Clinton said, adding that he was "encouraged" by the joint statement from McCain and Sen. Barack Obama.

Both of these men are Senators. One of them will be the next president. They both need to be involved in the decisions that are being made. The should be in Washington, debates can be rescheduled.


----------



## nolan50410 (Dec 5, 2006)

McCain isn't scared of the debate. He also admitted he knows very little about the economy. How exactly can a man who knows very little about the economy, help in any way to solve the greatest economic problem since the great depression. Is he going to go out and get coffee and doughnuts for all the guys who actually know how to fix the problem. McCain should really be ashamed of himself. Even Karl Rove said this could backfire. To think of the 2 years of work and $6 million spent here in Mississippi, and McCain would rather make a political photo-op. He is just pathetic.


----------



## Terpoxon (Sep 28, 2006)

Many Republicans have been voicing opposition to the Paulson plan. My impression is that since McCain is now effectively the party's leader in Congress he was returning to corral support, not so much hammer out fiscal details of the plan, which is largely being done by the Treasury Dept. and the Fed.


----------



## Helvetia (Apr 8, 2008)

young guy said:


> Maybe Obama is right, shouldn't presidents or potential presidents be able to do more than one thing at a time?


+1 Was it just a coincidence that Senator Obama was surging (no pun intended) in the battle ground states? Also see where they're trying to postpone the VP debate here in STL.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

Ultimately it comes down to this.

The Republicans are getting hammered by this crisis in the public opinion polls. McCain knows the ONLY way he can turn this crisis and the election in general around, is if he is somehow able to convince people that his presence in Washington was the "tipping point" that caused this to all work out for the best. And now that GW has summoned Obama to the White House, McCain has his failure strategy written as well.

If this settlement proves to be a success - McCain will say "I called for a suspension to put country first, and I was the one that drove this successful agreement"
If the settlement proves to be a failure - McCain will say "well Obama was here and signed onto this as well, so we are all to blame"

There bottom line is that there is no reason he cant do both, go to DC and help out and be in Mississippi on Friday Night for the debate. He has been crisscrossing the country for 2 years now on a private jet. There is no reason he cant do the same on Friday Night for the debate.


----------



## M6Classic (Feb 15, 2008)

Terpoxon said:


> Many Republicans have been voicing opposition to the Paulson plan. My impression is that *since McCain is now effectively the party's leader in Congress* he was returning to corral support, not so much hammer out fiscal details of the plan, which is largely being done by the Treasury Dept. and the Fed.


Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, among others, might not agree with you.

Buzz


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

jackmccullough said:


> So is there anyone here who really, seriously believes that McCain wants to duck--oops, cancel--the debate


I do. Heck, the topic of this debate is foreign policy. This is the one area where McCain expects to have the upper hand. If the topic of this particular debate was the economy I might be inclined to agree with you.

Cruiser


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

It doesnt make any difference what the "proposed" topic of the debate on Friday is. McCain knows it will turn to the economy one way or another.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

young guy said:


> Maybe Obama is right, shouldn't presidents or potential presidents be able to do more than one thing at a time?


Keep in mind that McCain and Obama are United States Senators and the Senate is currently deeply involved in coming up with a solution to a serious crisis that threatens us all. I suggest that they both get their butts back to Washington and do their full time job as United States Senators first. This is what they were elected to do, not run for President.

It isn't about doing more than one thing at once. It's about doing the job they were elected to do first. Solve this crisis by tomorrow and they can have the debate. Otherwise, they should do their jobs. Both of them.

Cruiser


----------



## jackmccullough (May 10, 2006)

Shouldn't that equally apply to the last two years, when McCain showed up less than anyone, even the guy who had the brain hemorrhage?


----------



## TMMKC (Aug 2, 2007)

It was certainly a "bold" move by McCain. I guess only history will teach us as to if it was necessarily a "smart" move. I wonder when Obama is going to make a bold move of his own and finally agree to doing a town hall debate.

Bush's speech last night reminded me of why I hate to listen to politicians talk. If and when the debates happen, I may just Tivo them or wait for the Cliff's Notes version.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

The work that is being done on this proposal is happening behind closed doors with members of the House Financial Services Committee. 

Neither McCain nor Obama sit on that committee, so they really have nothing to add to the process at this point.


----------



## young guy (Jan 6, 2005)

It just feels wrong: cancel interviews, cancel your own debate where you're the experienced one, don't let your vice-president nominee take questions from the press, try and cancel her debate also, tell David letterman you cant make his show because you have to leave to go to Washington and then go talk to Katie couric and not go to Washington.....etc, etc, etc


----------



## Terpoxon (Sep 28, 2006)

M6Classic said:


> Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, among others, might not agree with you.
> 
> Buzz


Oh Buzz, ever the pedant. He is the party's presidential candidate. He is the public face of the party, especially since Bush is a drag on the party and is therefore keeping a low profile. Yes, he is not part of the leadership hierarchy, but he is the public face of the party. And he also has a history of working with the other party and brokering deals (McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, The gang of 14.)


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

Although I lean to the conservative side, I vote for both Republicans and Democrats in almost every election, including for President. I try very hard to be objective and consider every viewpoint before pulling that lever.

I wonder if some of you realize how illogical you sound sometimes to those of us who are more in the middle. And I'm talking both those to the right and those to the left. I don't care what the issue, McCain is ALWAYS right and Obama is ALWAYS wrong; or vice versa. To folks like me neither side comes across as being very well informed when you take these type positions.

All I can say is that I'm thankful that we have all those folks in the middle who actually try to make well informed decisions. People who actually take the time to look at both the positives and the negatives on both sides (and there are positives and negatives on both sides) and try to actually LISTEN without all of the bias. Those are the folks who decide the elections and those are the folks who are either turned on or off by the antics of both the far right and the far left. And there are enough antics on both sides to go around.

Cruiser


----------



## jackmccullough (May 10, 2006)

I think this move by McCain is consistent with the observation George Will made in the Washington Post yesterday, which is that McCain's natural tendency is to panic and to react to events in a very visceral way. As Will, who, as you know, is an extreme conservative, points out, if you're comparing the two candidates, it's probably easier for someone without a lot of experience to get some than for a candidate whose instinctual decision-making mode is to react first and think later to switch to a more thoughtful approach.


----------



## M6Classic (Feb 15, 2008)

Terpoxon said:


> Oh Buzz, ever the pedant. He is the party's presidential candidate. He is the public face of the party, especially since Bush is a drag on the party and is therefore keeping a low profile. Yes, he is not part of the leadership hierarchy, but he is the public face of the party. And he also has a history of working with the other party and brokering deals (McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, The gang of 14.)


Nonetheless, McConnell and Boehner (and Reid and Pelosi) are the ones who are dug in and working out a deal while McCain (and Obama) is out running for president. Actually, it is not any of our elected legislators, but their staff who are doing the heavy lifting, trust me, I've been there. There is nothing wrong or disrepuatable about McCain and Obama spending almost all of their time running for President, but neither of them should pretend that he is critical to completing legislation to address our economic crisis.

It is curious that you call it pedantry whenever someone challenges one of your assertions.

Buzz


----------



## hurling frootmig (Sep 18, 2008)

Whoever is giving McCain this sort of advice needs to be fired.

Ducking a debate isn't the way to show competence to the American people. Changing the debate topic to the economy would be a step in the right direction though.


----------



## Quay (Mar 29, 2008)

jackmccullough said:


> I think this move by McCain is consistent with the observation George Will made in the Washington Post yesterday, which is that McCain's natural tendency is to panic and to react to events in a very visceral way. As Will, who, as you know, is an extreme conservative, points out, if you're comparing the two candidates, it's probably easier for someone without a lot of experience to get some than for a candidate whose instinctual decision-making mode is to react first and think later to switch to a more thoughtful approach.


For those that wish to read this hair-raising assessment of McCain by one of America's long-standing conservative observers and writers, it's here:

From the article:

_It is arguable that, because of his inexperience, Obama is not ready for the presidency. It is arguable that McCain, because of his boiling moralism and bottomless reservoir of certitudes, is not suited to the presidency. Unreadiness can be corrected, although perhaps at great cost, by experience. Can a dismaying temperament be fixed? _

Will quite clearly believes no in answer to the last question. Quite interesting!


----------



## SkySov (Mar 17, 2008)

Cruiser said:


> Keep in mind that McCain and Obama are United States Senators and the Senate is currently deeply involved in coming up with a solution to a serious crisis that threatens us all. I suggest that they both get their butts back to Washington and do their full time job as United States Senators first. This is what they were elected to do, not run for President.
> 
> It isn't about doing more than one thing at once. It's about doing the job they were elected to do first. Solve this crisis by tomorrow and they can have the debate. Otherwise, they should do their jobs. Both of them.
> 
> Cruiser


I heard on the news it was the House that paulson thing is going through right now.


----------



## KenR (Jun 22, 2005)

Cruiser said:


> Although I lean to the conservative side, I vote for both Republicans and Democrats in almost every election, including for President. I try very hard to be objective and consider every viewpoint before pulling that lever.
> 
> I wonder if some of you realize how illogical you sound sometimes to those of us who are more in the middle. And I'm talking both those to the right and those to the left. I don't care what the issue, McCain is ALWAYS right and Obama is ALWAYS wrong; or vice versa. To folks like me neither side comes across as being very well informed when you take these type positions.
> 
> ...


+1.

I am also somewhat conservative and may enjoy watching FOX news _at times_, but the bottom line is I need to hear neutral voices dispensing the news and debates without partisan vitriol. I want to make the decisions, not have them made for me by people who are adamant that there is only one side of a coin. The concept of "I hate the other side because they are by definition, pure evil, and therefore cannot have valid viewpoints" is for the birds.


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

jackmccullough said:


> I think this move by McCain is consistent with the observation George Will made in the Washington Post yesterday, which is that McCain's natural tendency is to panic and to react to events in a very visceral way. As Will, who, as you know, is an extreme conservative, points out, if you're comparing the two candidates, it's probably easier for someone without a lot of experience to get some than for a candidate whose instinctual decision-making mode is to react first and think later to switch to a more thoughtful approach.


And, who do you think George Will will be voting for?

Here is what I wrote in another post, since neither group running for P and VP are economically quailified.

_I don't know what you guys are complaining about. Your hero got a degree in sueing people, so how is that suppose to help the economy? Lawyers who sue are a parasite to the economy. Obama is so wet behind the ears he stands in a puddle. _

_Since McCain is older and supposed to know more what is your excuse for defending Biden? Biden is a bit dumber than McCain when it comes to economics. At least McCain wants to cut pork and has track record to show it._


----------



## Quay (Mar 29, 2008)

KenR said:


> +1.
> 
> I am also somewhat conservative and may enjoy watching FOX news _at times_, but the bottom line is I need to hear neutral voices dispensing the news and debates without partisan vitriol. I want to make the decisions, not have them made for me by people who are adamant that there is only one side of a coin. The concept of "I hate the other side because they are by definition, pure evil, and therefore cannot have valid viewpoints" is for the birds.


To me it's just tribalism, a core feature of humanity that comes and goes but is ever-present. Today in the US we've been divided along many lines, but the current political situation does often sound like members of two opposing tribes yelling at each other across a muddy river, the words more or less meaningless but said with great sound and fury. The other people watching the show are rightly turned-off by such displays.


----------



## M6Classic (Feb 15, 2008)

WA said:


> And, who do you think George Will will be voting for?
> 
> Here is what I wrote in another post, since neither group running for P and VP are economically quailified.
> 
> ...


Well, now I feel enlightened.

Buzz


----------



## Sartre (Mar 25, 2008)

Cruiser said:


> Although I lean to the conservative side, I vote for both Republicans and Democrats in almost every election, including for President. I try very hard to be objective and consider every viewpoint before pulling that lever.
> 
> I wonder if some of you realize how illogical you sound sometimes to those of us who are more in the middle. And I'm talking both those to the right and those to the left. I don't care what the issue, McCain is ALWAYS right and Obama is ALWAYS wrong; or vice versa. To folks like me neither side comes across as being very well informed when you take these type positions.
> 
> ...


Thanks to you for this, and to the several posters who followed in like vein.

tjs


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

> Of course, if you're running for president, how about just telling everybody you're not going to show up?


If I don't show up,I'll disappoint my fans who voted for me.


----------



## hurling frootmig (Sep 18, 2008)

WA said:


> Here is what I wrote in another post, since neither group running for P and VP are economically quailified.
> 
> _I don't know what you guys are complaining about. Your hero got a degree in sueing people, so how is that suppose to help the economy? Lawyers who sue are a parasite to the economy. Obama is so wet behind the ears he stands in a puddle. _
> 
> _Since McCain is older and supposed to know more what is your excuse for defending Biden? Biden is a bit dumber than McCain when it comes to economics. At least McCain wants to cut pork and has track record to show it._


It was a misguided thought the first time you wrote it. It was not worth repeating.


----------



## Terpoxon (Sep 28, 2006)

https://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D93E28NG0&show_article=1

McCain, in particular, was being leaned on by Democrats and fellow Republicans alike to deliver GOP votes. Placating them enough to bring them in line could be a tall order for the Republican presidential nominee who has a checkered relationship with the right wing of his party.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

jackmccullough said:


> Maybe you're in school and you have a test coming up that you're not ready for, or maybe you have a big presentation at work, or maybe you're a lawyer and you know that you're not ready for the trial you have coming up. Whatever it is, you just want the thing to go away, and you start racking your brain trying to figure out an excuse to just skip it. Maybe you call in sick, or maybe you can conjure up a traffic jam that prevents you from getting there.
> 
> Of course, if you're running for president, how about just telling everybody you're not going to show up?
> 
> So is there anyone here who really, seriously believes that McCain wants to duck--oops, cancel--the debate because his presence in Washington is so essential to coming up with a resolution to the financial crisis that he just can't afford the time away?


I agree Jack. The straightforward thing to do, would have been to simply refuse to debate, just like Obama refused McCain's repeated offers of a series of town hall discussions.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

jackmccullough said:


> Maybe you're in school and you have a test coming up that you're not ready for, or maybe you have a big presentation at work, or maybe you're a lawyer and you know that you're not ready for the trial you have coming up. Whatever it is, you just want the thing to go away, and you start racking your brain trying to figure out an excuse to just skip it. Maybe you call in sick, or maybe you can conjure up a traffic jam that prevents you from getting there.
> 
> Of course, if you're running for president, how about just telling everybody you're not going to show up?
> 
> So is there anyone here who really, seriously believes that McCain wants to duck--oops, cancel--the debate because his presence in Washington is so essential to coming up with a resolution to the financial crisis that he just can't afford the time away?


Is it possible that there must be some truth in that old saw, "a dog smells his own sh*t, first!"??


----------



## jackmccullough (May 10, 2006)

Am I correct in thinking that you're trying to insult me in some way? I guess I don't get it if you are.

If you are, do you also mean that we should take McCain's stated excuse for trying to bail on the debate at face value, even though he had time to be interviewed by all three networks last night, and he had time to be interviewed by Katie Couric at the time he had committed to be on Dave Letterman?


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

jackmccullough said:


> Am I correct in thinking that you're trying to insult me in some way? I guess I don't get it if you are.
> 
> If you are, do you also mean that we should take McCain's stated excuse for trying to bail on the debate at face value, even though he had time to be interviewed by all three networks last night, and he had time to be interviewed by Katie Couric at the time he had committed to be on Dave Letterman?


Jack, I continue to agree with you. If McCain's intent was merely to duck the debate (not sure that it is/was though), he should have simply told everyone he refused to debate, *exactly as Obama did when repeatedly challenged to a series of town hall events by McCain, and Obama was simply too scared to face him.*


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

jackmccullough said:


> Am I correct in thinking that you're trying to insult me in some way? I guess I don't get it if you are.
> 
> If you are, do you also mean that we should take McCain's stated excuse for trying to bail on the debate at face value, even though he had time to be interviewed by all three networks last night, and he had time to be interviewed by Katie Couric at the time he had committed to be on Dave Letterman?


Jack: Perhaps the question should be, are you trying to insult John McCain? Senator McCain has never "run away from a fight" in his life and I doubt the threat represented by a 'war of words' in a debate with Senator Obama, would be sufficient cause for him to cut and run, as you presume. Certainly Senator McCain is choosing a path that he believes will work to his best political advantage, just as Obama is doing, when he announced he will go on with the debate but, will be available by telephone...should they need his sage economic counsel(?)! Sage counsel based on what...experience? ROFALOL! Jack, have you heard, both Senators are running for the Presidency...and both are playing politics. It's just what they do!

Now I have a few questions for you;

1. How do you tell if a politician (Democrat or Republican) is lying? 
(A) His/her lips are moving.

2. What determines if an 'ultra liberal' will support a political candidate?
(A) If he/she is a Democrat!

Jack, you have become way too predictable but, "insult you"? Why I wouldn't think of it!


----------



## Francisco D'Anconia (Apr 18, 2007)

The reaction to Senator McCain's suspension of his own campaigning seems split down party lines. Is the reaction what people really think, or what their partisan prejudices are telling them to think? 

I just ask everyone who's offering an opinion about this to do one thing, ask yourself, if the other candidate did it, would your reaction be the same?


----------



## Quay (Mar 29, 2008)

It's all moot now. Senator McCain's mind was changed and he now is going to Mississippi to debate Senator Obama. This is not to say he flip-flopped. It just means the calculated political decision to go to Washington to seem "important" in the bail-out talks, even though he's not on any of the relevant committees, didn't work as well as his advisers thought it would. 

Should be some interesting television tonight, especially for Eagle, as both of the candidates' lips will be moving.


----------



## young guy (Jan 6, 2005)

Quay said:


> It's all moot now. Senator McCain's mind was changed and he now is going to Mississippi to debate Senator Obama. This is not to say he flip-flopped. It just means the calculated political decision to go to Washington to seem "important" in the bail-out talks, even though he's not on any of the relevant committees, didn't work as well as his advisers thought it would.
> 
> Should be some interesting television tonight, especially for Eagle, as both of the candidates' lips will be moving.


Wait he said he wouldn't debate unless they reached a deal, and they haven't yet - oh wait this is about party first not country first.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

eagle2250 said:


> Jack, have you heard, both Senators are running for the Presidency...and both are playing politics. It's just what they do!


This is something that the die hard supporters of both men seem to see in the other guy but not in their guy. Some of the things being said here, by people on both sides, are just plain silly. I guess they are so deep in the forest that they can't see the trees.

I will admit to supporting McCain, but that doesn't mean that I think everything he says and does is what I think he should say and do.

At the same time I don't support Obama, but that doesn't mean that I think he is dead wrong on everything he says and does.

I guess I wish the world could be that black and white (no pun intended). It would certainly make things easier. Of course maybe that is exactly why these die hards on both the right and the left who see no wrong in their guy and no right in the other guy act this way. It makes life much more simple because you don't have to think for yourself. :icon_smile_big:

Cruiser


----------



## Scoundrel (Oct 30, 2007)

jackmccullough said:


> Maybe you're in school and you have a test coming up that you're not ready for, or maybe you have a big presentation at work, or maybe you're a lawyer and you know that you're not ready for the trial you have coming up. Whatever it is, you just want the thing to go away, and you start racking your brain trying to figure out an excuse to just skip it. Maybe you call in sick, or maybe you can conjure up a traffic jam that prevents you from getting there.
> 
> Of course, if you're running for president, how about just telling everybody you're not going to show up?
> 
> So is there anyone here who really, seriously believes that McCain wants to duck--oops, cancel--the debate because his presence in Washington is so essential to coming up with a resolution to the financial crisis that he just can't afford the time away?


Yeah, something like that has happened to me before


----------



## Relayer (Nov 9, 2005)

Obama is resorting to tactics that have worked for him in the past wrt leadership.

Basically, he's voting "Present!"

The question is will it work on this issue of the bailout?


----------



## MinnMD (May 6, 2008)

*House Republicans*

The leader of the House Republicans had not been consulted about the plan prior to McCain's arrival. They have concerns about the plan negotiated by Bush with the Democrats. McCain said that he shared concerns of the House Republicans. Now they're part of the negotiation.

MinnMD


----------



## nolan50410 (Dec 5, 2006)

Wayfarer said:


> Jack, I continue to agree with you. If McCain's intent was merely to duck the debate (not sure that it is/was though), he should have simply told everyone he refused to debate, *exactly as Obama did when repeatedly challenged to a series of town hall events by McCain, and Obama was simply too scared to face him.*


Good to see you back Wayfarer. However, I must disagree with you (go figure). The difference between this debate and the 10 town hall events McCain suggested is that this debate has been in place for 2 years, the candidates agreed upon the details of this debate many months ago, and $6 million has been spent by Ole Miss and the state of Mississippi on this debate. The series of town hall events McCain proposed were never agreed upon under any circumstance. To say McCain is justified for skipping this debate because Obama didn't go along with his town hall proposal is sort of like a ummmm........logical fallacy?? That may be the wrong words, I am from Mississippi afterall.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

Quay said:


> ...Should be some interesting television tonight, especially for Eagle, as both of the candidates' lips will be moving.


Perfectly played and thanks for this afternoon's best chuckle! I will be watching and, while it may not surprise you, the wife is getting out of "Dodge" (read that as...the house) on an outing with the grand kids, so as not to be a witness to my conduct.  While I'm a McCain supporter, Obama is clearly the better debater (experienced or not!). This evening should be "interesting", as you said!


----------

