Well, I'll Bet That Caught Them By Surprise

Rubbish.

Obama initiated the call this morning.

So are we going to postpone the election too? I don't think we can support a lengthy suspension of the campaign.

Anon, as of 3:04 PM Obama is planning on debating an empty podium.

You're entitled to your opinion, but not your own facts. Obama has not initiated shit.

So are we going to postpone the election too? I don't think we can support a lengthy suspension of the campaign.

I don't see why. People will vote on November 4th with whatever information they have available based on the candidates' records.

Brock - Obama called McCain at 8:30 AM (per CNN) and asked to discuss offering a joint statement. McCain called back at around 2:30 then made his announcement.

So? Obama didn't make a call to suspend the campaign. That was McCain's initiative.

Fighting about who called who first makes Obama look petty.

Fighting about who called who first makes Obama look petty.

Like that's something new...

Not knowing what was discussed between the two candidates, my immediate take is that McCain, realizing he's loosing the campaign (see just about any poll you want) is trying to stave off defeat. Sort of like trying to call time out in a gunfight because you ran out of ammo.

It's consistent McCain. You'll recall he constrained the Republican convention because of Hurricane Media Whores -- oops, I mean Gustav. He released an ad on Obama's night at the Democratic Convention simply congratulating him (Obama) on an amazing accomplishment. That's not to even touch his famous/infamous "reaching across the aisles" McCain-RavingLeftWingLoon legislation.

Sigh. He really is this crazy old Victorian who thinks good men of opposing visions can sit down and work their problems out rationally. I don't know how he thrives in this Internet age, with so much of the America turning into a botnet of rage-filled mindless attack droids.

Sort of like trying to call time out in a gunfight because you ran out of ammo.

No, that's stupid. First of all, McCain can't stop time itself, or events, which is all that has been happening lately to change the race. By refusing to debate, or suspending his campaign, he can't stop people from thinking about things, or NBC from running innuendo after innuendo on Governor Palin's membership in a secret Devil-worship cult and promise to cut the balls off every union worker in America once inaugurated. So while he can stop his own campaign, he can't stop the campaigning itself.

Secondly, if you're saying he postponed the debate because he's afraid of taking on Obama in a straight-out gunfight, no teleprompters, no editing -- that's lunacy entire. McCain has never been afraid of the TV lights, and he's had roughly 20 years more experience than Obama in this kind of thing. Furthermore, he's seen Obama turn into a meandering condescending stumblebum when he's off script, on his own. He's certainly not afraid of The Perfesser.

But it's also true that he's specialized in doing stuff to knock the Obama machine off its rails. I can see this being part of that process. He may well be saying to himself that he (McCain) is ready for a debate any old day, he doesn't need three days seclusion to bone up and practise not being a snot. So by throwing the schedule into chaos, he may figure he's boosting the risk of an Obama fumble when they do talk, while not changing his own risk. That's not to mention reminding viewers once again who it is that consistently volunteers to be first to wade into the shithole, whether it be in Hanoi or Washington, to Get The Job Done. If only his instincts about what to do when he gets there matched his courage and sense of duty in stepping promptly up to the plate, sigh.

Carl, I think both men genuinely believe that " good men of opposing visions can sit down and work their problems out rationally. "

I'm watching Obama right now -- he just said (paraphrasing) "Presidents need to be able to handle more than one thing at a time." I think that's pretty effective response to McCain's surprise move, and it would work pretty well if Obama had to debate an empty chair.

Looks like a McCain aide added some clarification, stating that the campaign suspension was waiting on agreement from Obama, so it probably won't happen.

McCain's camp should offer Palin on a "She shares my ideals" concept and "she is ready for the debate". That would turn the check into checkmate, with Obama having to decide between following McCain's lead or refusing to debate a woman because she's not good enough for him.

That would be soo sweet if they sent Sarah. Oh the irony, oh the consternation, oh the fun of watching the Obama campaign spin on its axis.

I'm sorry but this is nuts. I may be wrong but I fully expect that when the public is polled on this, they are going to say that the debates should proceed as planned.

McCain's temperament is unsuitable for the Presidency, as George Will has stated. If we needed more proof of that fact, we received it today.

We have now gone beyond Ross Perot territory.

The first snap poll has 14% thinking this is a good idea.

For historical reference:

– September 24, 1864: The nation is literally at risk of collapse, mengaged in a large-scale civil war: “Yet the campaign for the presidency was “now being prosecuted with the utmost vigor,” as one could read in the New York Times.”

– September 24, 1932: The nation is mired in Depression, coping with it a full time job, “Yet Herbert Hoover prepared to give a large speech in Iowa and Franklin Roosevelt had just given what became a famous address to the Commonwealth Club of San Francisco.”

– September 24, 1944: World War II well under way, with the United States engaged in fierce fighting, “Yet President Roosevelt had just officially launched his campaign for a fourth term, while Thomas Dewey took his turn speaking in San Francisco, challenging Roosevelt’s supremacy.”

(-from Yglesias' blog)

I truly believe today might well be the day McCain lost the election. In addition he has placed the GOP in a really awful situation - the pressure to cook up a bailout rescue is now exponentially higher on the GOP side.

I'm watching Obama right now -- he just said (paraphrasing) "Presidents need to be able to handle more than one thing at a time." I think that's pretty effective response to McCain's surprise move, and it would work pretty well if Obama had to debate an empty chair.

I disagree. Presidents, just like everyone else, must obey the laws of physics and not be in two places at once. Ergo, they need to prioritize, and I think McCain's choice to prioritize taking a few days to fix the subprime fiasco over making a particular date with teleprompter, when there's more than a month to go before the election, is perfectly reasonable.

This credit fiasco is the crisis of the decade, easily, and needs to be addressed by Monday. Interbank lending has come to a complete standstill while the markets wait on Congress to announce their move. At this point merely waiting is more harmful than either Plan on the table. Congress must act soon, one way or the other.

I look forward to Obama's vote on the bailouts. I doubt he'll get away with "Present" this time.

Good call by McCain and he should not send Palin as any kind of replacement; she should be right there with McCain as much as possible as there is plenty enough to do (I know she will not have the kind of access as John McCain but at the very least she will be valuable working the GOP side of the aisle).

For the critics in case you get it your way and as a possible consequence there's nothing in place Monday morning I want to hear your opinions come Tuesday unless you've spontaneously combusted from shame.

The real trick isn't who does or doesn't show up on for the debate. What McCain is really doing is forcing himself and Obama to show their hand on the economy. By showing up for the debate in Washington and the vote, then you sort of go on the record.

"Presidents need to be able to handle more than one thing at a time."

Only works if Obama, you know, actually handles both things. If he only does the debate in Mississippi and misses the big debate and vote in Washington, then he's handling one thing. Of course, Senate Democrats can always hold up the vote for Obama, and that should go over very well in the down ballot elections. They can shorten debate and bring the vote early; in which case, McCain then actually can say he did both and acted earlier than Obama, who grandstanded instead.

Obama's really looking like a sophomore right now. And for those crowing about McCain dropping in the polls. Well, maybe not so much.

Rather than defy the laws of physics by being in two places at once, couldn't each Senator use a telephone? Use a video phone with high bandwidth for nuanced negotiation.

As for the actual vote, I heard on the radio that McCain hadn't voted since April. I wouldn't be surprised if Obama hadn't voted in as long a time, or longer. If you care about the business of the Senate, and not the symbolism, I would think that the practice of vote-swappiing means that Senators needn't vote very much.
As long as all your fellow Senators practice vote swapping in good faith, seems to me that you only need only one senator to actually be present, to cast the deciding vote.

What am I missing?

By the way, Obama didn't suggest using a telephone. He suggested that they both use airplanes. Do senatorial business in Washington, and then fly in for the debate. Technology would seem to provide the answer either way.

One more alternatice solution: Rather than delaying the debate, why not apologize to the hosts and move the debate to DC. Use the Senate floor if no other venue can be found on short notice.

With these multiple posts, you're sounding a little desperate, Bob.

Carl, I think both men genuinely believe that " good men of opposing visions can sit down and work their problems out rationally. "

No, both men say they believe good men et cetera. But only one of them acts on it. The other votes the party line (or "present") and hews to strict Democrat orthodoxy. Or do you have actual evidence that Barack Obama has ever cut a compromise with his political opponents ever, on any subject? Any Obama-RavingRightWingLoon legislation out there?

I'm watching Obama right now -- he just said (paraphrasing) "Presidents need to be able to handle more than one thing at a time."

Sure, if they're things of equal importance. You have to deal with the Russians and Iranians at once. But Presidents also have to prioritize effectively. Only an idiot would suggest the President continue with his golf game when the Secret Service guy yells to him that a nuke has just gone off in San Francisco, because "a President should be able to do more than one thing at a time."

Indeed, what did y'all on the left say about George Bush continuing to read "My Pet Goat" while the World Trade Center towers were going down? Did you say then that a President needs to be able to do more than one thing at a time? That there was no reason not to spend time getting good photo ops with cute children -- i.e. pursue a purely political goal, much like debating your opponent in an election -- when the US was plunged into a sudden crisis?

You're also forgetting that John McCain and Barack Obama are Senators. If they don't have serious things to say about a bill in front of the Senate, if they don't have major influence -- then where's that "experience" argument, huh? If either is such a lightweight that he won't be missed from the debate, then why are we considering them for the top job?

I think that's pretty effective response to McCain's surprise move, and it would work pretty well if Obama had to debate an empty chair.

On foreign policy? That's about the only debate I can see Obama winning, frankly. I can understand why he wants the debate to go on. The firestorm about the economy guarantees that the audience for a debate on foreign policy is going to be small, that most people -- certainly those swing voters for whom the economy is concern #1 -- are not going to be paying much attention. That's ideal for Obama. Whatever dumbass Kumbaya crap he says will go right down the memory hole.

I realize it's traditional to be cynical about politics and all, but I kind of like the idea that McCain takes his day job -- U.S. Senator -- seriously enough that he thinks he should not be merely voting "present" on a whopping monster act of Congress that could cost us all a fortune and lead to massive government interferenc in financial markets.

Sorry to clutter things up. But I'm not desperate. Just as you rarely praise McCain, I rarely criticize him. After all, he believes in the power of big government to make things better. When he won the nomination, I was really happy! If he had picked a moderate for VP, I'd have stayed happy.

What am I missing?

What you're missing is that not all votes in the Senate are equally important. McCain missing four votes in July about designating it National Peacelover's Month or allowing the Post Office to raise the price of first-class stamps by a penny is not in the least the same as missing a vote on whether the government should basically buy up every crappy mortgage in the country and go into the lending business big time.

What your guy is saying here is:

(1) Having a debate on foreign policy is real important stuff to me, just as important as trying to hammer out a piece of monster legislation affecting all of us for decades, or...

(2) I can't do any good in Washington, because I'm a first-term junior Senator from Illinois and nobody will listen to me anyway, or...

(3) I don't need to be in Washington, because I'm just going to vote the Democratic Party line, and the other Democrats there -- Harry Reid, Chris Dodd -- can think and talk for me just fine.

Maybe he should go to Germany instead, huh? Give a rousing post-racial, post-modern, post-sanity speech to the Bundestag, while the real men get to the dirty ugly work of running the country. Seriously, man, if only we could elect Barack as the head of state and McCain as the head of government...or maybe Palin, I dunno.

So McCain wants to do the job he was hired to do and some of you want to vilify him for it. How many of you thought the surge was a bad idea? All or most of you and who was right? What McCain is doing is his job. To some it looks like leadership, to others, stupidity. Obama is focused on winning the election, McCain is focused on serving his country. This is as stark a comparison as you will find.

Sorry to clutter things up. But I'm not desperate. Just as you rarely praise McCain, I rarely criticize him. After all, he believes in the power of big government to make things better. When he won the nomination, I was really happy! If he had picked a moderate for VP, I'd have stayed happy.

I doubt anyone here, including the other Obama shills, buys most of what you claim. I doubt you're "desperate", but you've done nothing here but criticize McCain.

Looking at the issue, I'd have to say that I trust McCain's judgement here more than Obama's.

About the business of the Senate: I was under the impression that the important speeches on the Senate floor were for show, and that the really important negotiations go on behind the scenes, concurrent with vote counting by the whips. Is that wrong?

About the business of the Senate: I was under the impression that the important speeches on the Senate floor were for show, and that the really important negotiations go on behind the scenes, concurrent with vote counting by the whips. Is that wrong?

No.

What's your point?

I was under the impression that the important speeches on the Senate floor were for show, and that the really important negotiations go on behind the scenes, concurrent with vote counting by the whips.

I've heard the same thing. It's not like the English Commons, where you really do argue stuff out on the floor.

So, you know, being present in person is kind of critical, isn't it? You can't just phone it in, send someone an e-mail, give your speech over a satellite video link, not if you intend to have real influence, or exert real leadership.

Are you sure you're arguing for Obama's decision here?

Karl, Soon after McCain's nomination was assured, I was talking to an ex-hippy high school art teacher. He was moaning about McCain. I said "hey, cheer up, now we know that the next president will believe in evolution, will take man-made climate change seriously, and best of all, he will fund stem-cell research." I could have added comments about working for clean government and campaign finance reform (of one sort or another), not drilling in ANWAR, tightening up gun laws, banning torture, not being virulently anti-immigrant. But moreover, I think McCain turns to government and laws to solve problems, and I doubt the libertarians here would disagree.

There are huge differennces between the candidates, but the disparity could have been much greater than it is. I'd rather focus on McCain than on me, but about me: I think I've been arguing with Rand's attacks on Obama rather than criticizing McCain. McCain's choice of Palin is the big exception.

Well, if this is true, then either Obama can't do two things at once, or has decided to follow McCain's lead. I'm sure someone can say there's a third option, but not Bob, because he's already jumped on the Obama bandwagon that McCain couldn't do two things at once. So much for that bit of criticism.

Carl, maybe you're different, but I think many people could manage to work on "backroom" deals by phone and even email. I'm currently working with a small company in the UK. We're designing a gizmo together, and it requires as much discussion and negotiation as it does building and testing. We rarely meet face to face - just lots of email and phone calls.

The president of the USA can't be having meetings in person with international and domestic leaders all of the time - he's got to be good at phone calls, if not email. To do the business of the senate remotely, it would be conference calls or lots of serial one-on-ones. You'd have to act like a teenage girl on the phone, calling serially, but I wouldn't be surprised if that's how Senators behave even when they are in DC.

Also: why can't they have the presidential debate and then work on the weekend? The goal is to get a deal done by Monday, right? And I hope it won't seem too critical of McCain to point out that he still has time to speak at the Clinton Global Initiative on Thursday.

Bob, it matters whether your local school board or maybe your state textbook buying committee believes in evolution. Whether the President does or not is irrelevant, even assuming a detailed knowledge of evolution is a key life skill for functioning adults (kinda doubt it, myself -- we got along the first 100 years of the Republic without it).

Taking climate change seriously is fool's gold, because no one knows WTF to do about it. It's not something waiting for decisive leadership, it's something waiting for far better scientific understanding of climate and weather and a plausible scenario for action that doesn't have us all living in small villages again walking to work (in the fields).

In any event, there's nothing stopping citizens from voluntarily doing something about climate change, if they think they know what to do. You're looking for a President to jam an action plan down the throats of a 60% majority of Americans who don't want one. Considering the huge implications of such a plan -- nationalized healthcare would be peanuts by comparison -- that is flat out impossible, so long as we live in a democracy.

Finally, there is money up the wazoo for stem-cell research. California has $3 billion going begging, for example. Consider the possibility that this fetishization -- served up for political purposes by the Bush Hates Science (Is Closet Neanderthal) Democrats -- is actually sucking the oxygen out of some other important science research, genomics, proteomics, gene therapy, stuff like that. If there was no money in stem cells -- if research was flat stopped -- you might have a point. But it's not, so this is just niggling over exactly how much money should be spent.

None of this is remotely important compared to the big stuff like making sure your tax structure doesn't throttle the economy, or that your regulatory environment doesn't encourage madness like subprime mortgage or dot-com bubbles. You're not going to give a damn about evolution instruction in high schools if you get a whacking big pay cut at work and gas goes to $10/gallon and your 401k vanishes in a puff of smoke, and there won't be any national wealth to spend on stem cells.

Carl, I don't disagree with some of what you say and other things you said took me by surprise (money for research - on anything -going begging?), but about evolution: it isn't just about what is taught in high school. A majority of adults and all governmental leaders should have basic science literacy. Politicians at the national level may have advisors, but in the end, they should have a gut level understanding of reality, and you can't have that without science literacy. Basic biology is relevant to many big decisions, and you can't understand quite a bit of biology without understanding evolutionary theory. (I maintain that nearly everyone who says they don't believe in evolution actually doesn't understand it in the first place, even at a high school level.) And yes, the first 100 years of our nation were poorer for our lack of biological knowledge (including our leaders lack of it), and I'm sure the next 100 years will be better for whatever biological knowledge is gained and seeps into the heads of our politicians.

And beyond that: People who say they "don't believe in evolution" strike me as likely to be people who can't accommodate their religious beliefs to the modern world, and are likely to be unhelpfully influenced by their religion in other areas as well.

Ergo, they need to prioritize, and I think McCain's choice to prioritize taking a few days to fix the subprime fiasco over making a particular date with teleprompter, when there's more than a month to go before the election, is perfectly reasonable.

It would be fantastic if McCain rolled up his sleeves and fixed the bond market fiasco (which has now expanded way beyond subprime mortgages) if he were President, or Vice President, or Treasury Secretary, or Federal Reserve Chair, or Senate Majority Leader, or Senate Minority Leader, or even if he chair or ranking minority member the Senate Finance Committee. But he isn't any of these people; he is only on the vaguely relevant Senate Commerce Committee and he's not ranking minority member of that one either.

So how does it make sense for McCain to be the one to blow into Washington to solve this problem, leaping over 10 other figures? Obviously it doesn't make sense, except by the argument that McCain is the man since he's running for President.

Which means that this is yet another Hail Mary pass for the McCain campaign. Now, a Hail Mary pass can be perfectly respectable if you're behind, but you should only have to do it once, not five times. It's also true that policy is more important than the campaign; but the idea that this is deep statesmanship is ridiculous. It's not; it's a Calvinball campaign strategy.

Also, of course, a debate isn't a "date with a teleprompter". After so much talk about teleprompters and so many complaints about the media, the debates are the public's most direct comparison of the candidates. Besides, even though McCain is too busy for the debate, he did keep his date with Katie Couric. I should say this carefully because there has been way too much media-bashing on this blog. What is true is that Couric specifically is rather shallow and not the best use of McCain's time if he really is that busy.

Shared physical location and thus availability/accessibility (and lack of easily justifiable "escape") matters because the situation is most likely going to require tough and time-consuming negotiations to find a deal that a majority can vote for. Conference calls etc. are simply not flexible, beneficial, or powerful enough to be the sole tool.

It's not a customer relationship where one hand has the inherent advantage. It's not a partnership where all parties have the same relatively simple aims from the get-go. It's not a decision to be simply handed down by this or that leader of a committee. It will not be an orderly choreographed procedure with everyone taking turns.

It's a cat-herding exercise only with the additional challenge that it has to be done by the cats themselves. Get back to me when you get 100 cats to do that by audio-visual teleconferencing ^_^

It might also require multiple votes with continued hard work and plenty of real politics in-between each version.

And physical and mental exhaustion can in itself be part of the solution as it helps force the participants to really start thinking and asking themselves what the truly important parts and positions are.

Lastly nothing conveys the notion of being stuck in the same place as well as actually being physically stuck in the same place ^_^

I'm watching Obama right now -- he just said (paraphrasing) "Presidents need to be able to handle more than one thing at a time." I think that's pretty effective response to McCain's surprise move, and it would work pretty well if Obama had to debate an empty chair.

I see it as a question of priorities. McCain appears to believe that working on this problem is more important than campaigning. Obama seems to believe the problem is no more important than his campaign and perhaps less. Multi-tasking has its place but without proper priorities, the important stuff tends to get neglected.

McCain, Obama, and Biden are all sitting senators. They earn a salary of over $10,000 a month to be a senator. McCain and Obama both have been neglecting their jobs for over a year (and Biden more recently) to run for higher office. Have they also declined their paychecks and benefits during this time? Somehow, I rather doubt it. Maybe it's time for all three of them to put aside their personal ambitions for a moment and actually earn their paycheck.

Has McCain actually suspended his campaign? Per Politico.com's Republican blogger, his campaign is still putting out news updates. Not only that, instead of dashing to Washington, he stopped at New York to give a speech.

Not only that, but the same post says the timetable starts after the appearance in NY.

And I don't think suspension means placing the entire staff on leave and cancelling any requested interviews with staff members that the media may have. The Politico is being pretty naive and amatuerish in such beliefs.

And I don't think suspension means placing the entire staff on leave and cancelling any requested interviews

That's right Leland. McCain's interview with Katie Couric was really important, and so was his speech to the Clinton Global Initiative. They aren't frivolous, like a presidential debate.

Besides, McCain has to hurry back to Washington, lest they strike a deal without him.

If you think debates are important, then take it up with Obama's campaign.

What a boneheaded move on McCain's part. About 24 hours after McCain suspended his campaign, an agreement has been reached on the bailout plan:

http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/25/news/economy/deal_reached/index.htm?postversion=2008092513

I don't think McCain even made it back to Washington before the deal was reached, nevertheless took part in the negotiations.

Instead of appearing statesman-like and more caring about real issues than Obama, all McCain ended up doing was looking reactionary and ill-informed about what's actually going on in Washington, not to mention disrupting his campaign.

What a waste...

I don't think McCain even made it back to Washington before the deal was reached, nevertheless took part in the negotiations.

Instead of appearing statesman-like and more caring about real issues than Obama, all McCain ended up doing was looking reactionary and ill-informed about what's actually going on in Washington, not to mention disrupting his campaign.

What a waste...

Or maybe Congress got off the dime and actually did something. Perhaps the Democrats decided that McCain coming to actually do his job (unlike Obama) would make them look bad. Before, it was in their interests to prolong the mess to increase their chances of winning the election.

Oooooooh they have a plan! Happy happy joy joy!

They've got agreement on the principles! Yay! They can all go home now because surely that's all it takes. Right? Oh come on how hard can it be when they've all decided that they want to solve it? That's one of those principle-thingies right there ^_^

Aren't they doing great? Be proud Joe Blow.

From the Crappy Notions Network:
"At least one prominent Republican says matters still aren't settled."

Ok so somebody has a brain (Joe Blow should sue) and they let it show, a CNN editor must be in trouble as we speak.

It's clear they're nowhere close yet Larry but yeah somebody lit a fire under their seats, both McCain and Bush.

Frankly, I'm not sure what McCain has achieved by going to Washington other than blowing up what seemed to be a deal - I saw Utah Republican Sen. Bennett speak to the press about this. If that's his stragey - blow the deal - and take credit for it - Wow. He is quite the maverick. He does keep us on our toes!! It would be an exciting Presidency, not knowing when he might decide to launch, that's for sure.

Listen, I don't think there is one Democrat who likes the bailout. As Obama just said in his presser, "right now there are only bad options and worse ones" . Does anyone seriously think the Dems won't benefit if the bailout fails and banks start flipping over and dying? Makes you wonder why they don't play cynical politics with this thing. Perhaps they are a tad more patriotic - you know, the non-lapel-pin kind.

"It's clear they're nowhere close yet Larry but yeah somebody lit a fire under their seats, both McCain and Bush."

Huh? It's House Republicans that are opposing the deal, not the Democratic majority. If anything, McCain (and Bush) now appears to be incapable of leading his own party, nevertheless lighting fires under members across the aisle.

McCain needlessly tying the unpredictable albatross of these negotations around the neck of his campaign demonstrates poor judgement. This was a bad risk he didn't need to take, for the country or his campaign.

Anonymous they're both opposing it and turning it into a clusterf..k.

That was and is to be expected* (once again we're talking cat herding here) and why McCain, Obama, and Biden should focus on this instead of campaigning.

* It's a good thing as it implies they've at least gotten as far as to realize they don't actually agree on the details (which shouldn't be a surprise to anyone). The road to something that actually passes goes right thorough there and it's their job to find it.

Or if they'd rather relinquish their positions as senators that would be fine too but until they do this is and should be their primary responsibility.

As for the details of the original proposal I continue to think that the bailout/Bernanke approach is insane so I don't fault Congress (no matter party affiliation) for raising a stink about it - they should! Even so the parts of the alternative(s) that amounts to "not punishing the guilty" are obscene too and nothing more than infected band-aids at the wrong places. Bailouts are treating the effect rather than the cause, better than collapse/death but worse than going after the root problems.

I'm not sure what McCain has achieved by going to Washington other than blowing up what seemed to be a deal - I saw Utah Republican Sen. Bennett speak to the press about this. If that's his stragey - blow the deal - and take credit for it - Wow. He is quite the maverick.

If that is all he accomplished, then good for him. The deal stunk and shouldn't have gone forward.

> Huh? It's House Republicans that are opposing the deal, not the Democratic majority.

It's not "House Repubs", it's a majority of House Repubs. A significant minority supports the deal.

However, they're irrelevant because the bill can pass without any House Repubs. (Unlike the Senate, the Dem House majority can pass a bill.)

They're an obstacle only because Pelosi isn't willing to take credit for saving America. (Or funding Acorn.)

Considering that she's been willing to pass other things on a pure party-line vote, this is curious.

From http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0908/McCain_at_campaign_HQ_making_calls.html?showall

After a late night flying back to Washington, McCain is at his campaign HQ making calls to push a deal on the financial bailout, according to a top aide.

'He won't be headed to Capitol Hill today.

As for why not, Mark Salter told the campaign pool reporter: "Because he can effectively do
what he needs to do by phone."

The campaign is to put out a list of people he called later.

==========

Hmmmpf!

Catch any related news? Like how both Democrats and Republicans describe the current state of the ongoing process? And I'm sure you noticed McCain showing up at the debate on Friday.

But by all means keep hmmmpf'ing those phones ^_^