Obama on Bailout in Nevada. Fine Wall Street if Money isn't Made Up in the Market.

TPJ: Barack Obama spoke in Nevada today about the economic crisis and did a great job explaining how some kind of package is necessary for all of us: But while the decline of the stock market is devastating, the consequences of the credit crisis that caused it will be even worse if we do not act and act immediately.

Because of the housing crisis, we are now in a very dangerous situation where financial institutions across this country are afraid to lend money. If all that meant was the failure of a few big banks on Wall Street, it would be one thing.

But that's not what it means. What it means is that if we do not act, it will be harder for you to get a mortgage for your home or the loans you need to buy a car or send your children to college. What it means is that businesses won't be able to get the loans they need to open new factories, or hire more workers, or make payroll for the workers they have. What it means is that thousands of businesses could close. Millions of jobs could be lost. A long and painful recession could follow. Let me be perfectly clear. The fact that we are in this mess is an outrage. It's an outrage because we did not get here by accident. This was not a normal part of the business cycle. This was not the actions of a few bad apples. This financial crisis is a direct result of the greed and irresponsibility that has dominated Washington and Wall Street for years.

But while there is plenty of blame to go around and many in Washington and on Wall Street who deserve it, all of us now have a responsibility to solve this crisis because it affects the financial well-being of every single American. There will be time to punish those who set this fire, but now is the moment for us to come together and put the fire out.

TPJ: But it wasn't all gloom and doom from Obama, he conveyed the seriousness of the situation and the need to do something soon but also gave us hope and courage that we can get out of this mess:

I know that many of you are feeling anxiety right now - about your jobs, about your homes, about your life savings. But I also know this - I know that we can steer ourselves out of this crisis. Because that's who we are. Because this is the United States of America. This is a nation that has faced down war and depression; great challenges and great threats. And at each and every moment, we have risen to meet these challenges - not as Democrats, not as Republicans, but as Americans. With resolve. With confidence. With that fundamental belief that here in America, our destiny is not written for us, but by us. That's who we are, and that's the country we need to be right now. This is no longer just a Wall Street crisis - it's an American crisis, and it's the American economy that needs this rescue plan.

TPJ: And while he pushed for a bailout package he made it clear that he wants one that better protects tax payers than the first bill:

First, I said we needed an independent board to provide oversight and accountability for how and where this money is spent at every step of the way. Second, I said that we cannot help banks on Wall Street without helping the millions of innocent homeowners who are struggling to stay in their homes. They deserve a plan too. Third, I said that I would not allow this plan to become a welfare program for the Wall Street executives whose greed and irresponsibility got us into this mess. And finally, I said that if American taxpayers are financing this solution, then you should be treated like investors - you should get every penny of your tax dollars back once this economy recovers.

This is not a plan to just hand over $700 billion of your money to a few banks on Wall Street. If this is executed the right way, then the government will temporarily purchase the bad assets of our financial institutions so that they can start lending again, and then sell those assets once the markets settle down and the economy recovers. If this is managed correctly, we will hopefully get most or all of our money back, or possibly even turn a profit on the government's investment - every penny of which will go directly back to you, the investor. And if we do have losses, I've proposed to institute a Financial Stability Fee on the entire financial services industry so that Wall Street foots the bill - not the American taxpayer.

I've also said that if I'm President, I will review the entire plan on the day I take office to make sure that it is working to save our economy and that you are getting your money back. This morning, I proposed one such idea that might increase bipartisan support for this plan and shore up our economy at the same time: expanding federal deposit insurance for families and small businesses across America who have invested their money in our banks.

The majority of American families should rest assured that the deposits they have in our banks of up to $100,000 are still guaranteed by the federal government. That guarantee is more than adequate for most families, but it is insufficient for many small businesses to meet their payroll, buy their supplies, and create new jobs. The current insurance limit of $100,000 was set 28 years ago and has not been adjusted for inflation. I've proposed raising the FDIC limit to $250,000 - a step that would boost small businesses, make our banking system more secure, and help restore confidence by reassuring families that their money is safe.

TPJ: This is the most imformative, detailed, sobering yet uplifting speech that I have heard during this whole economic disaster. It's nice to hear someone talking some sense and talking in away that we non-economists can understand and accept. The only thing that I hear from McCain is muddled positions that change from day to day.

Palin Says that Voter's Question was "Gotcha Journalism."

On Monday night, CBS' Katie Couric talked to John McCain and Sarah Palin about their apparent disagreement on attacking terrorists within Pakistan. Echoing the words of a voter who asked Palin a similar question, the VP candidate turned the question on end, equating questions from the public to "gotcha journalism."

TPJ: Hmm. How is it "gotcha journalism" when the questions came from an average voter "when (as Marc Ambinger at The Atlantic) a ropeline comment by Joe Biden about clean coal gets turned into two [McCain attack] ads?" We are not talking about questions from a partisan pundit here, we're talking about an average American trying to decide who to vote for. Getting out on the trail which is how running for office words, you get difficult questions and part of deciding which candidates are better prepared for office is the answers to those questions.

It was a valid question, this isn't remedial school for presidential candidates or golf where you can get mulligans. This is a seriously demanding job interview for the two highest jobs in the land and we can't afford to play these childish games. You know she can't hold her own when you have to try and explain away every gaffe and inadequate answer to questions by saying those questions are all "sexist," from a "biased media" or a "gotcha question." If she can't even handle a voter's question then how would she be able to handle questions from the White House press corps? If she doesn't want to answer the tough questions then she needs to go back to Alaska. And the hits keep on coming from the Palin:

According to Politico, CBS is holding back a clip of the VP candidate flummoxed when asked to name key Supreme Court decisions apart from Roe vs. Wade. Of concern to McCain's campaign, however, is a remaining and still-undisclosed clip from Palin's interview with Couric last week that has the political world buzzing. The Palin aide, after first noting how "infuriating" it was for CBS to purportedly leak word about the gaffe, revealed that it came in response to a question about Supreme Court decisions. After noting Roe vs. Wade, Palin was apparently unable to discuss any major court cases. There was no verbal fumbling with this particular question as there was with some others, the aide said, but rather silence.

TPJ: So let me get this straight, she wants to be a possible president, leader of our government and yet doesn't understand one of our most important branches of government? The Supreme Court? Yet the guy [Obama] who has a constitutional law degree isn't qualified? It's upside down world folks. She would be in a position to appoint judges to the court and yet knows nothing it appears of what the court has done or does to greatly influence our society. You'd think she'd at least know the case that gave the 2000 election to Bush. I want a potential vice-president to have a least a basic knowledge of the highest court in the land and she can only name one case. She is a classic example of the failure of our education system to teach civics like use to be done.

COLORADO POLL:

A new Colorado poll shows that my home state now shows Obama leading McCain by 5 points according to an average of several polls. Barack was only ahead by 2 last week in the Centennial State.

---End of Transmission---

Palin Contradicts McCain on Pakistan and Supports Obama's Position. Is John McCain's Gambling in Line with Conservative Family Values? Hardly.

Does Sarah Palin agree with Barack Obama (and disagree with John McCain) on attacking known terrorist sites inside Pakistan? Despite the Republican nominee's recent denial, evidence is mounting.

While campaigning in Pennsylvania on Saturday, Palin commented on the possibility of a unilateral strike inside the country by saying "if that's what we have to do stop the terrorists from coming any further in, absolutely, we should." This came one day after McCain himself, in the first presidential debate, went after Obama aggressively for taking the same position.

Seeking to downplay her remarks on Sunday, McCain did Palin the disservice of suggesting her musings on the stump were a one-off mistake, reflecting precious little about the campaign's policy. "I don't think most Americans think that that's a definitive policy statement made by Governor Palin," McCain said on ABC's "This Week."

But even in her notably brief record of statements on foreign policy matters, Palin has now "stated repeatedly" something else entirely. In her first major network television interview with Charles Gibson, Palin remarked on the Pakistan question by saying: "In order to stop Islamic extremists, those terrorists who would seek to destroy America and our allies, we must do whatever it takes, and we must not blink, Charlie, in making those tough decisions of where we go and even who we target."

Gibson even went in for a follow-up to make sure he heard correctly, calling her first pass "a blizzard of words." After pressing Palin for her position on a hypothetical attack "with or without" the approval of the Pakistani government, she said: "I believe America has to exercise all options in order to stop the terrorists who are hell-bent on America and our allies. We have got to have all options out there on the table."

TPJ: John McCain seems the odd politician out on this matter because Bush has been lobbing missiles into Pakistan for some time now to target al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders. Palin has also apparently mislead us again, this time on so-called "trade missions" with Russia. A claim that she put forth as evidence of international experience which is thin even if it was true:

In a Thursday interview with Katie Couric, Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin cited "trade missions" with Russia as her one tangible piece of foreign policy experience.

What trade missions? Research doesn't show a single Alaska-Russia trade mission since former Democratic governor Tony Knowles visited Siberia in 1997, when Palin was running Wasilla, according to Salon.com.

TPJ: She's the worst V.P. selection since Dan Quayle and I would dare say worse.

Spokespeople for the McCain/Palin campaign did not respond to requests for comment.

IS JOHN McCAIN's GAMBLING IN LINE WITH CONSERVATIVE "VALUES?"

Senator John McCain was on a roll. In a room reserved for high-stakes gamblers at the Foxwoods Resort Casino in Connecticut, he tossed $100 chips around a hot craps table. When the marathon session ended around 2:30 a.m., the Arizona senator and his entourage emerged with thousands of dollars in winnings. Mr. McCain was betting at a casino he oversaw as a member of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, and he was doing so with the lobbyist who represents that casino, according to three associates of Mr. McCain.

The visit had been arranged by the lobbyist, Scott Reed, who works for the Mashantucket Pequot, a tribe that has contributed heavily to Mr. McCain’s campaigns and built Foxwoods into the world’s second-largest casino.

TPJ: I thought gambling was a no-no amongst most conservatives and Republicans? We are constantly bombarded by the Republicans that they are the only ones with values. It is a holier than thou attitude that produces politicians who beat us over the head about how bad we non-Christians and non-conservatives are for doing things like gambling. However, despite thinking otherwise, even the holier-than-thou crowd is imperfect, which makes their downfalls that much more scandalous, hypocritical and outrageous. Remember conservative Bill Bennett who wrote a book on conservative values and virtues? Well it turned out that Bennett an avid gambler who was known to lose millions of dollars. And Ironically, Bennett and Empower America, the organization he co-founded and headed at the time, opposed the extension of casino gambling in the states.^[8]

Conservative values are also known for opposing drugs, alcohol and cigarettes. While "czar" at the Office of National Drug Control Policy, Bennett was a cigarette smoker. He checked himself into a $700-a-week therapeutic resort to kick his two-pack-a-day cigarette habit. After failing to quit, he carried nicotine chewing gum with him everywhere. Political opponents of Bennett's policies accused him of hypocrisy for calling marijuana, cocaine and heroin immoral, and opposing their legalization, but not treating alcohol and tobacco the same way. This is important too since marijuana isn't physically addictive whereas cigarettes are.<sup>[11]

UPDATE: Palin is talking right now that we need to put children with special needs at the front but that hasn't been the policy of the conservatives for a long time. As someone with a SMI (severe mental illness) I can tell you that we haven't been at the "Front of the line" in the least during the past 8 years and I doubt that would change despite Palin's words to the contrary today. I so no reason to hope for that as McCain is pretty much a carbon copy of Bush. When he had a chance to fill out an extensive survey on what he'd do to help those with special needs and mental health he said no. He chose instead to simply release a vague, short paragraph whereas Obama filled out that survey in detail.</sup>

What's with McCain not Looking at Obama During the Debate?

Much has already been written about the particulars of Friday nights debate so I won't rehash the minutia but the thing that I was most taken with was how McCain wouldn't even look into Obama's eyes. It was completely immature and unpresidential to not even acknowledge his opponent who represents millions upon millions of Americans. Just because you disagree with Obama doesn't mean you have to be rude and disdainful.

What is he going to do when he's in a room with a leader who he doesn't like, just ignore them and not meet their gaze? What is this, high school? He's a petulant man and while Obama doesn't agree with him on most issues at least he showed McCain some respect by engaging him with his eyes and body language.

John McCain was acting like a drama queen and not like a possible president who must be able to show at least a basic level of respect for others. What a child. He unfortunately re-enforces the stereotype of the military brat that has never grown up and matured. I can respect his different views but not his condescending behavior. The body language of not meeting the gaze of your oppenant is a sign of weakness and often something people do when they are lying.

McCain was on "This Week" with George Stephanopoulos and said that he wasn't ignoring Senator Obama but was talking to the American people into the camera. Well, how was he "talking to the American people" when Obama was talking and he was just standing there ignoring him? And besides, Barack is an American person too!!

---End of Transmission---

John McCain Parachutes into D.C. and Blows Things Up.

I'm watching Senate Majority Leader Senator Harry Reid right now talking about the bailout negotiations and he said that they were getting close to a deal until John McCain blew into Washington D.C. It appears now that since his arrival the negotiations have totally fell apart. The insertion of presidential politics by McCain clearly hasn't been helpful.

Meanwhile, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has literally resorted to begging to get this deal done:

Thursday, in the Roosevelt Room after the session, the Treasury secretary, Henry M. Paulson Jr., literally bent down on one knee as he pleaded with Nancy Pelosi, the House Speaker, not to “blow it up” by withdrawing her party’s support for the package over what Ms. Pelosi derided as a Republican betrayal. “I didn’t know you were Catholic,” Ms. Pelosi said, a wry reference to Mr. Paulson’s kneeling, according to someone who observed the exchange. She went on: “It’s not me blowing this up, it’s the Republicans.” Mr. Paulson sighed. “I know. I know.”

The rapid unraveling of an agreement over the Wall Street bailout seemed to coincide with Republican presidential candidate John McCain's ostentatious return to the Capitol. "It was the very outcome the White House had said it intended to avoid," the Times Sheryl Gay Stolberg wrote, "with partisan presidential politics appearing to trample what had been exceedingly delicate Congressional negotiations."

"John McCain did nothing to help, he only hurt the process," the senior Democrat said at a joint news conference with Senate banking committee chairman Christopher Dodd. Barney Frank, the Democratic chair of the House of Representatives financial services committee, said: "I think this was a campaign ploy for Senator McCain. The meeting convened by Bush was a "photo op and political theater that had nothing to do with us getting to work," Dodd said.

TPJ: As you know John McCain said that he wouldn't go to tonight's debate unless there was a bailout deal by then. Well, it looks like there will not be an agreement yet we hear now that he will be there tonight to debate. This just confirms to me that this whole thing was a ploy, a gimmick and once again he has mislead the American people. They claim McCain was suspending his campaign and calling for postponing the debate to put "country first." Well, it's clear that he was actually putting his campaign first. Surprise, surprise. It also turns out that McCain was cramming in 2-3 hours of debate prep time last night. I thought getting a deal done was his top priority? What a tool.

---End of Transmission---

David Letterman Mocks McCain for Not Showing Up on His Show. What is he Hiding?

So John "Fly-Boy" McCain not is not only suspending his campaign to fly into Washington D.C. and "save the day" but he bailed on David Letterman and Letterman was none to happy. He was on a roll with his comedic pokes aimed squarely at the Senator. It was priceless entertainment so if you happened to miss it, here you go. Laugh out loud and spread it to your friends:So, well now a spokesperson told the Today Show that Senator McCain felt that it was "inappropriate" to do comedy in light of the current economic crisis. I'm surprised he didn't say that it was inappropriate to laugh at him because he was a P.O.W.

Oh stop bitching and whining. It's exactly because of our economic woes that we should go on with comedy. Damn it I'm tired of the stress of the last two weeks and need levity. Especially having to listen to McPain in the Ass every damn day pulling stunts like pulling out of the debate. And the irony is that despite saying that his presence in D.C. will somehow help the economy the University of Mississippi would stand to lose 5.5. MEAL-leon dollars (as Austin Powers would say) if the debate is canceled!! How is that helping the economy John? You're going to screw over the university now because you can't handle two things at once? And if that's the case then it's fair to ask about his competency to handle the many duties of president.

UPDATE: McCain supporter Sen. Lindsey Graham tells CNN the McCain campaign is proposing to the Presidential Debate Commission and the Obama camp that if there's no bailout deal by Friday, the first presidential debate should take the place of the VP debate, currently scheduled for next Thursday, October 2 in St. Louis.

TPJ: Ah HAH!!! It's all starting to make sense now. They don't want Sarah Palin to see the light of day.

P.S.-I still have a free Obama sticker to give to someone. All you have to do is ask. I'd prefer to send it to someone in a battleground state but will give to someone else if there are no battleground takers.

---End of Transmission---

John McCain Wants to Delay First Debate with Obama. It Seems Like a Political Ploy.

In a strange twist, John McCain this afternoon has decided to try and postpone the first debate this Friday to focus on the economic crisis and return to Washington D.C.:

"At 8:30 this morning, Senator Obama called Senator McCain to ask him if he would join in issuing a joint statement outlining their shared principles and conditions for the Treasury proposal and urging Congress and the White House to act in a bipartisan manner to pass such a proposal. At 2:30 this afternoon, Senator McCain returned Senator Obama’s call and agreed to join him in issuing such a statement. The two campaigns are currently working together on the details," Obama spokesman Bill Burton said in an e-mail to reporters sent immediately after McCain spoke.

McCain's dramatic and unexpected statement seems to undercut any overtures he might have been making to bipartisanship. Instead of issuing a joint statement with Obama -- as the two campaigns apparently had discussed -- McCain chose to snag the spotlight for himself with a flamboyant display.

TPJ: I'm not sure why he's doing this except to try and gain some ground on the economic field where he has been lacking. So here's my view, we can do two things at once, a president has to be able to multi-task. The debate only takes one evening, it's not like it's a week long symposium of something. I don't think the bailout bill depends upon Obama and McCain being there on Friday. I don't think they are going to vote on anything Friday and as far as I know they haven't even set a date at all to vote. This seems like a political stunt by McCain. Country first? That's what he would have believe with this odd move. Especially since he has missed more votes than any other Senator in the current session of Congress. However, it looks more like the candidate putting himself first in a desperate attempt to shift the focus away from his terrible economic record and lack of understanding.

It's unlikely that Congress would be voting on a bailout during the few hours the candidates would be debating, and Obama previously announced plans to return to Washington Saturday morning. Congress is expected to remain in session through the weekend to pass legislation addressing the current crisis.

---End of Transmission---

Additional Information on McCain's Plan to Deregulate Health Care.

McCain's proposal to allow health insurance companies to sell policies across state lines would allow insurers, like the banks before them, to ignore consumer protections and sell bare-bones policies with high out-of-pocket expenses. In fact, by creating a deregulated national marketplace in which insurers no longer have to comply with rules that require they provide cancer screenings, maternity care, mammograms, and emergency services, or abide by rules that "limit the rates that can be charged to higher-cost consumers and that limit who can be excluded for a health plan," insurance companies could sell plans across the country that lack even the most basic consumer protections.

Fewer requirements would translate into cheaper but less comprehensive policies which would pull heathier individuals out of larger insurance pools. A recent analysis of McCain's health care proposal from the Center for American Progress Action Fund points out that as healthy individuals vie for cheaper policies across state lines, states with more stringent consumer protections would be left with sicker and more expensive patients, increasing health care costs across the board.

TPJ: Our current health care system favors the insurers as is and McCain's plan gives them even more power and control. It's a system that favors the wealthy and those without any major medical condition which is often the wealthy because they can afford more preventative treatment, quality treatment and stellar insurance plans. Without state regulation (McCain wants federal regulation instead which is currently much less than that of the states) you will see insurers with even more power and control over your health care needs.

Despite wanting to strip each state of their right to impose their own regulations on health insurers Mr. McCain claims to be a Federalist. This is a popular American view that favors giving states as much equal power as possible with the federal government. The McCain plan is a laughable one that assumes that corporations will regulate themselves. Yeah, that sure worked out with the finanicial industries didn't it John? And there will be no help toward uninsured children under John McCain as far as I can tell. He voted against the popular and successful S-CHIP bill that provides health coverage to many of these kids. In this time of crisis abroad and at home with so many domestic needs (economy, health care) we simply can not afford John McCain's outdated and failed ideas of deregulation and privatization of social security.

In other news, 83% of Americans believe that we are on the wrong track in this country and since McCain wants to keep going on that wrong track I think it's clear who we should vote for if we are ready to change the track we are going down. It's time to get serious about this election and remember how we got into this mess and who lead us here--Bush, McCain and many other irresponsible Republicans. Do you really want to reward them for the pile of fly ridden elephant shit that they have dumped upon us?

---End of Transmission---

John McCain's History of Deregulation. Plus, Keating 5 and Why We Need Obama's Style of Change NOW!!

The McCain camp is still flat-footed on this economic crisis. John McCain had a press conference today where he still had that deer in the head-lights look of panic. He is lost in the sea of a life-long record of pushing the very policies that precipitated this economic crisis. McCain has tried to tell us all that he should be president because he has experience but the experience that he has on the most important problem of our time (the economy) is bad experience. Even as late as early this month he was extolling the virtues of loose regulation:Then he tells us that he's a leader but in that press conference today he looked like a kid lost in a super store. He appeared disengaged, frustrated and wishy-washy. In contrast Barack Obama looks calm, cool and a showing a steady hand while showing compassion and flashing that engaging, comforting smile of his.

I wasn't going to bring this up on my blog but given that we are in the midst of the worst economic collapse since the great depression I think it's important. That story being John McCain's involvement in the last great economic crisis--the savings and loan collapse in the 1980's. The basics of the scandal known as the "Keating 5" are that the five politicians involved (including McCain) were accussed of improperly aiding Charles Keating Jr. who was the chairman of the Lincoln Savings and Loan Association which was the target of a federal investigation. McCain was ultimately cleared but at the very least showed "poor judgment. "

So in another time of economic emergency do we really want to turn to a guy who says that he doesn't know enough about the economy and has connections to the Keating 5 scandal where he at least showed terrible judgment? I sure don't. And since judgment has been an important issue in this election then I think it's fair and important to take into consideration McCain's poor judgement in the savings and loan scandal.

Barack Obama's message of change is even more important now that we have seen the poor judgement and irresponsible economic behavior from the many years of a Republican dominated Congress and 8 years of the Bush administration. We need to scrap our entire system of "business as usual" in Washington that has for too long favored Wall Street over Main Street. We are currently witnessing the final nail in the coffin of trickle-down Reaganomics. It is time to seize back control away from the anti-regulation fat cat crowd who have been raking in on the Bush tax cuts (which McCain supports) during a time of war and during an orgy of extreme laissez-faire policies pushed through by the Republican rulers all these years.

In that press conference mentioned earlier in this post, McCain also (yet again) defended Carly Fiorina's record at Hewlett-Packard where she cut 20,000 jobs, tanked the company and bailed out with a golden parachute "severance" package to the tune of $21-40 million. Way to surround yourself with change agents there John. Carly Fiorina is another one of the players in this economic house of cards crashing down around us. She is exactly the kind of player that represents the fat cat CEO crowd that runs the McCain campaign. She needs to be fired and so does John McCain by the American people with no golden parachute to land him into the White House.

McCain Showed Little Interest and Concern in the Economy Before this Current Crisis.

TPJ: This is an excellent article. Thanks to Shaw over at Progressive Eruptions for making me aware of it:

Comfortable With Subject

Obama called for the overhaul of the financial-regulatory system and tougher enforcement well before this past week's traumas.

Detached observers who watched him last week, especially in a Bloomberg Television interview, were taken by how conversant and comfortable he was on the subject, despite his thin record. Few detached observers came away with that impression watching the Arizona senator.

Much of the re-regulatory fever focuses on the Federal Reserve and any new agencies created to clean up the fiasco. Central, however, will be a more vigorous Securities and Exchange Commission, or whatever holds that investor-protection function.

McCain displayed a sudden interest in the SEC last week when he demanded that Chairman Chris Cox be fired. When his campaign was asked if the senator had ever criticized the current commission's performance before, they failed to respond.

All For Obama

Tellingly, three former SEC chairmen, a Democrat, Arthur Levitt, and two Republicans, David Ruder and Bill Donaldson, have endorsed Obama. Levitt is a board member of Bloomberg LP, the parent company of Bloomberg News.

Donaldson, who was tapped by Bush to head the SEC, says Obama called him last year about the financial-regulatory problems. He has never heard from McCain.
``Obama has been talking about the need for better financial regulation well before this crisis hit and has done some real thinking about it,'' says Donaldson, a lifelong Republican. ``McCain comes across as someone who suddenly realized changes have to be made.''

There is a case for McCain: it's if you believe in less regulation, that the government should get out of the way and let the markets work their will.

No `Real Understanding'

``I don't think anyone who wants to increase the burden of government regulation and high taxes has any real understanding of economics,'' McCain said this spring at an Inez, Kentucky, town hall meeting, where he also declared ``the fundamentals of our economy are good.''

Until recently, he repeatedly invoked Ronald Reagan's calls for less regulation. He voted for the 2002 Sarbanes-Oxley corporate-governance regulations -- then last year said he regretted that vote.

McCain isn't averse to some regulations. He has strongly championed a greater federal role in campaign finance, tobacco and boxing. In each case, he saw a clear villain -- special- interest money, a tobacco product that puts profits ahead of lives, and unscrupulous boxing promoters.

There has been little evidence that prior to last week he ever put financial firms in this category. Although he assailed excessive corporate compensation last week, McCain has opposed a tepid House-passed bill that would give corporate shareholders the right to cast a non-binding vote on compensation of top executives.

Turning to Gramm

The person he has turned to most for counsel on such matters is his ex-Senate colleague Phil Gramm. Gramm is a political Gordon Gekko, a brainy economist with a Darwinian view of markets and public policy.

It's not easy to remember what the financial world looked like 10 days ago much less 10 months ago. Decisions that will be reached after this election will be the most important since the 1930s.

Obama, as more than a few Democrats are complaining, hasn't been as quick, sharp -- or demagogic -- as they would like. McCain has been beset by deeper difficulties: an inchoate and inconsistent message that seems to reflect political exigencies more than principled convictions.

On the financial crisis, last week belonged to Obama.

(Albert R. Hunt is the executive editor for Washington at Bloomberg News. The opinions expressed are his own.)

---End of Transmission---

McCain Campaign Won't Rule out Phil Gramm as Treasury Secretary.

For those of you who have developed a fondness for Tucker Bounds-themed bondage and domination videos, here's another YouTube where David Shuster chortles his way through a segment in which Bounds cannot or will not bring himself to assure the American people that Phil Gramm - who recently called America a "nation of whiners" but who led the effort for the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act that paved the way for the economic collapses of today - will not, under any circumstances, become Secretary of the Treasury in the McCain administration. If Bounds keeps at these sorts of "explanations," the world's supply of false equivalencies may run out by the first week of October.

TPJ: How hard is it to say that Gramm would absolutely not be apart of a McCain administration? You'd think that the campaign would jump at the chance of distancing themselves from Gramm. Afterall, this is the guy that said we weren't in a recession but a mental recession, that the economic struggles we are feeling are all in our heads and that we're all just a bunch of "whiners?." Gramm has severely hurt the campaign with these comments and his connection to this economic crisis so you'd think that they would say in no uncertain terms that he won't come within a mile of the White House. Unless they want to continue the reckless deregulation agenda of the past 8-12 years if they nabbed the White House.

Yet another example of the McCain campaign being out of touch with the American people and our economic struggles. It shows amazing tone deafness that they would even hint at considering putting Gramm in at Treasury!! This would be literally putting the fox in charge of protecting the hen house. The McCain campaign yet again showing poor judgment and on the most important concern/issue of this election, the economy.

And speaking of poor judgment from the McCain camp, John McCain said in a recent interview that Carly Fiorina (one of his top economic advisers) did a great job as CEO of Hewlett-Packard:Well as a son of a long time H.P. employee who went through the Fiorina reign and as a citizen of a city that relied upon H.P. as a top employer I know McCain is either lying about this or showing again his propensity to being out of touch. Fiorina drove H.P. off a cliff and when the dust cleared some 20,000 employees were fired or forced to retire early (that was my dad's case). She was fired for her mismanagement but was given an excessive severance package between $20-40 million.

McCain also said in that Today Show interview that he won't raise any new taxes despite having just added to our national debt this $700 billion dollar bailout of Wall Street. Apparently he buys into the Dick Cheney school of finance that says that "deficits don't matter." Well they do matter and if he hasn't figured that basic but important point from the economic shock of this past week then he clearly isn't capable of being president. That's continuing the Bush/Cheney policies that drove us off this economic cliff.

---End of Transmission---

McCain Owns 13 Cars in Addition to his Seven Houses. So Who's the Celebrity and Elitist Now?

(Sly Humor: John McCain seen here shopping for his 14th car).

Newsweek has a story up comparing the number of cars owned by the presidential candidates. It's not even close. And certainly, it doesn't provide the type of man-of-the-people image that John McCain's handlers want to present in the current economic crisis. As the magazine reports: "When you have seven homes, that's a lot of garages to fill. And based on public vehicle-registration records, here's the score. John and Cindy McCain: 13. Barack and Michelle Obama: one." As for Obama, he and Michelle own a 2008 Ford Escape hybrid.

James: This is an issue because the McCain campaign and its surrogates have been saying that Obama is an out of touch celebrity and elitist. However, it seems like McCain's cars and houses and private jet make him look more like the high-rollin' celebrity. It reminds me of that MTV show Cribs (not sure if it's still running) but it was basically a show that took you through a tour of the houses of the rich and famous celebrities. Well, one of the parts of the tour is the garage which usually shows luxary car after luxary car. So I want to know when the "Cribs: John McCain" episode will air?

I can't relate to someone who has 7 homes and 13 cars and I'm sure most middle-class Americans can't either. And Obama drove a beat up, broken down car for a long time while working as a community organizer.

Maybe (as someone on Huffington Post commented) McCain had to buy all these cars because he kept forgetting where he parked!!

---End of Transmission---

McCain's Health Care Plan: Deregulation and Free Market.

OK, a correspondent directs me to John McCain’s article, Better Health Care at Lower Cost for Every American, in the Sept./Oct. issue of Contingencies, the magazine of the American Academy of Actuaries. You might want to be seated before reading this.

Here’s what McCain has to say about the wonders of market-based health reform:

Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation.

"In contrast to John McCain's emphasis on markets and deregulation, Barack Obama's reform plan relies on an employer mandate, new public and private insurance programs, and insurance-market regulation,"

So McCain, who now poses as the scourge of Wall Street, was praising financial deregulation like 10 seconds ago — and promising that if we marketize health care, it will perform as well as the financial industry!

TPJ: He's against states have the right to establish certain regulations of their own? This from a self-proclaimed Federalist!! It's bad enough that we are all losing money and having to foot the bill for irresponsible corporations who engorged themselves on risky loans in the midst of little regulation imposed and advocated for by people like McCain and his economic buddy Phil Gramm. As well as President Bush. However, can you imagine millions of Americans losing their health care coverage over-night because McCain pushed deregulation of the health care industry?!! SCARY!!!!

John McCain doesn't know the economy, doesn't know health care and is reckless about social security too. It appears that if it was all up to him that he'd deregulate everything. Such policies have already rocked the market and now he wants his hands on our health care and social security? He's reckless, risky and out of touch. We now know how McCain would rule and with each glimpse it gets worse and worse.

---End of Transmission---

John McCain and the Failed Bush Economy.

I fully understand the need to bail out many of these corporations as they are vital to our economy yet I can't help but wonder if we'd be in this economic crisis if Bush and McCain who have been in power for 3 quarters of the last 7-8 years hadn't pushed deregulation of the banking and insurance agencies. Especially since the experts are saying that the lack of regulation of these industries was a major reason that we are facing such a bad economy right now. If we had been minding the store like government should then we might not have had to infuse these corporations with so many tax payer dollars.

John McCain and George Bush have shown us terrible judgment as their actions have directly helped cause this crisis and now McCain wants us to believe that we should give him another chance at leadership even though he and his buddy Phil Gramm pushed us into this direction of economic collapse. McCain is trying to pretend that he hasn't traditionally been for wide open, unregulated financial markets and that he has for a long time and as late as this spring been a proud, self-proclaimed "deregulator" for years.

And meanwhile the Bush/McCain support of the Iraq war is bleeding our treasury and our tax dollars in breath-taking amounts every hour of every day. That is money that is sorely needed here at home to help create well paying jobs and a better health care system. It is time to get out of Iraq, tell them we've done all that we can do and that now they're on their own, return home and infuse that money back into the American worker and our infrastructure putting people back to work. As well as using that money to broaden the green economy to employ even more people as Obama has been saying for at least a year now that we should do.

Under the past 8 years of Bush and McCain rule we have neglected our domestic needs for the domestic needs of Iraq. So much for John McCain's slogan, "Country First." And now McCain is saying that if he were president that he'd fire the Security and Exchange Committee chairperson, Christopher Cox yet a person holding that position can't be fired by the president. Obama had a great response to that misunderstood call by McCain while campaigning in New Mexico yesterday:

``Here's what I say: In 47 days, you can fire the whole trickle-down, on-your-own, look-the-other-way crowd in Washington who have led us down this disastrous path,'' he told a crowd of 9,500 in Espanola, New Mexico. ``Get rid of this philosophy, get rid of the do-nothing approach to our economic problems and put somebody in there who is going to fight for you.''

TPJ: McCain flounders with economic affairs (affairs that Americans see as issue number one this election season) of which he has said he doesn't know enough about. However, Barack Obama is relating to the people and offering fresh ideas and showing that he is a stable ship in the storm and has the passion to tackle this issue with all his might. McCain meanwhile stumbles over cue cards to talk about the issue and looks generally like a deer blinded by the headlights of a economic crisis that he appears quite clearly not to understood or know what to do about.

McCain means Bush economics continued and that is a huge part of what got us into this free fall of economic collapse. Yes, the Clinton administration has to share part of this blame but not nearly as much as under the Bush administration and the Republican Congress. The Republicans are the party of an unbridled economy. The Bush/McCain policies are now the ones that we are dealing with now. This election is about whether we rubber stamp those Bush/McCain policies or head into Washington with a whole new group of people to tackle this problem with a fresh perspective. I vote for change because we can't afford more of the same reckless, laissez-faire, Hoover economic nonsense of the past 8 years.

---End of Transmission---

McCain Toying with Michigan Voters. Engaging in Double Talk and Remains Tone Deaf. Plus, Economic Patriotism.

"I reject the doom and gloom that says our nation is in decline. America's best days are ahead of us," McCain said during a visit to a factory of US car manufacturer General Motors in Lake Orion in the Midwestern state of Michigan.

TPJ: So now McCain is the champion of the auto workers who have lost their jobs and willing to fight for jobs in Michigan yet he told Michigan in the primaries that jobs lost aren't coming back!! In Ohio he told autoworkers the same thing that their jobs aren't coming back but now he's the hero of the auto industry? Yet another flip-flop of position to suit the political climate of the day. Michiganders and Ohioans are smarter than that McCain. He also said at the time in Michigan that that "I don't believe that we are headed for a recession" and (as he said the other day) "I believe the fundamentals of this economy are strong, and I believe they will remain strong." Again, terrible judgment, foresight and exposure of his lack of understanding (of his own admittance) of the economy.

Plus, of course America's best days are ahead of us but that doesn't mean that our country isn't in decline right now. Part of the reason that we are in the economic mess that we are in is because of people like McCain and Bush trying to ignore reality and tell us all that everything is o.k. America, go back to drinking your beer and watching American Idol. You can't fix a problem until you admit that we have a problem. Admitting that our country is in decline isn't weakness, it's realism. The longer you ignore reality the bigger the problem gets. Obama is willing to tell us the truth and level with us--McCain obviously is not.

Americans aren't buying into McCain's blind optimism as of June nearly 8 in 10 Americans said that we are on the wrong track in this country. And as of September 14-16th 73% of Americans have a negative view of the current economy and 81% are pessimistic of the direction of the economy. So Americans are quite unanimous that our economy is in trouble and not admitting that our country is in an economic decline is reckless of McCain and shows just how out of touch he is with average Americans.

Meanwhile Sarah Palin is speaking right now in Iowa. She is slamming Obama's V.P. Joe Biden for saying that those who make over $250,000 a year should pay more taxes as part of being patriotic. Which to me makes sense because without the benefits of living in America many of these folks wouldn't be in such a comfortable economic strata. So Sarah slams the idea that you can be patriotic in many ways but then claims that she and McCain always put "Country First!!!" Dumbasses. If you put country first then you should be agreeing with Biden's statement!!

---End of Transmission---

John McCain, Phil Gramm and the Collapse of the Banking and Insurance Industries.

TPJ: Think McCain has nothing to do with the current banking crisis? Think again:

A decade ago, Sen. John McCain embraced legislation to broadly deregulate the banking and insurance industries, helping to sweep aside a thicket of rules established over decades in favor of a less restricted financial marketplace that proponents said would result in greater economic growth.

Three years earlier, McCain had joined with other Republicans to push through landmark legislation sponsored by then-Sen. Phil Gramm (Tex.), who is now an economic adviser to his campaign. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act aimed to make the country's financial institutions competitive by removing the Depression-era walls between banking, investment and insurance companies.

That bill allowed AIG to participate in the gold rush of a rapidly expanding global banking and investment market. But the legislation also helped pave the way for companies such as AIG and Lehman Brothers to become behemoths laden with bad loans and investments.

McCain now condemns the executives at those companies for pursuing the ambitions that the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act made possible, saying that "in an endless quest for easy money, they dreamed up investment schemes that they themselves don't even understand."

In 2007, he told a group of bloggers on a conference call that he regretted his vote on the Sarbanes-Oxley bill, which has been castigated by many executives as too heavy-handed.

In the 1990s, he backed an unsuccessful effort to create a moratorium on all new government regulation. And in 1996, he was one of only five senators to oppose a comprehensive telecommunications act, saying it did not go far enough in deregulating the industry.

TPJ: So clearly, John McCain was apart of creating the problem that we are now facing in this financial crisis and collapse of major banks and other financial institutions. However now that he is on the hot seat he is trying to change his tune and I hope that Americans don't fall for it. McCain has had his chance in Washington to set responsible economic policy but instead sided with the corporations whose greed knows no bounds and pushed for continued deregulation of the financial sector. So why on Earth would anyone want to give him another chance when he fucked it up the first time?!!!

It's convenient to have a record of deregulation of the financial sector for decades and then pull a fast one and switch to being some kind of Eugene Debs populist. Especially since he helped craft with Phil Gramm the very policies that have failed and severely hurt the American worker and economy!!

In other news, beleaguered savings and loan corporation Washington Mutual is up for sale. Shares in Washington Mutual fell nearly 10 percent on Wednesday to $2.09; they have plunged 94 percent over the last 12 months. This week alone, investors have been frightened by Standard & Poor’s cutting of the bank’s debt rating to junk.

---End of Transmission---

John McCain and Earmarks. Plus, Hillary Clinton Critical of Palin.

Out on the stump, John McCain gets wild applause each time he promises as president to veto every spending bill that contains an earmark. The promise to veto any bill with congressional earmarks, which come by the scores in the president’s annual budget request doesn’t take into account the executive branch. McCain has not promised to get rid of the executive branch’s line-item spending requests.

TPJ: So McCain is not so clear on earmarks after all. Why is he being so ambiguous about doing away with presidential executive spending requests if he is against every earmark and spending request in Congress? What's good for the Congress should be good for the executive branch. And as much as we all want to reduce earmarks it isn't the constitutional job of the president to decide how money should be spent. That power of the purse resides firmly in the hands of the Congress to separate the powers and keep them balanced so that no one branch has more power than the others. It is fact that not all earmarks are pork barrel spending on pet projects, many are important that help funds this such as:

But as many veteran lawmakers point out, for every far-flung Alaskan bridge project or hippie museum, there are dozens of other earmarks that are politically palatable, like military base housing improvements, levee upgrades and Veterans Affairs hospital wings.

And many of these are never requested by the executive agencies or the White House.

TPJ: Yes, John McCain is a maverick but in all the wrong ways including throwing the baby out with the bathwater on earmark spending. It is reckless to do away with ALL earmarks since many bring great benefit to communities all across the country and provide for the defense of the country:

Young points out that it was one of his earmarks back in the early 1990s that created the National Bone Marrow Registry. And the Predator drone — an unmanned aircraft critical in the war on terrorism — was created by a congressional earmark.

TPJ: It is much wiser and shows better judgment in my opinion to reform the process to help reduce the frivolous earmarks that give the money appropriation system in Congress a bad reputation. Instead of doing away with them completely because many of them are necessary and much needed. What I just described is Obama's balanced and well thought out approach to the situation. You can't repair every thing that is broken with a hammer and that is exactly what McCain would do by absolutely eliminating every earmark.

HILLARY CLINT ON ON SARAH PALIN:

"A lot of people are missing the boat here," Clinton told ABC News' Diane Sawyer, aboard the "Good Morning America" Whistle-Stop Express. Palin has generated a great deal of interest, Clinton acknowledged, but added, "That's not a good enough reason to vote for that ticket. There's a lot of talk in the country about who are you for in this election, but that's not the right question. The right question is, who is for you."

Clinton suggested that the McCain-Palin team doesn't understand "the struggles you face."

"So I don't think it's inconsistent for a lot of people to say well hey, that's exciting, what an exciting pick, and still say, but that's not the ticket for me and my family," she said.

The National Organization for Women will snub Palin's history-making candidacy and endorse the Obama-Biden ticket Tuesday in Washington. Palin's opposition to abortion rights is a major stumbling block for Now and other women's rights organizations.

---End of Transmissi0n---

McCain the Deregulator. Plus, Carly Fiorina, John McCain and Excessive CEO Retirement Packages.

John McCain has suddenly discovered populism in this campaign as he was faced with the collapse of the housing market and now the fall of the big financial firms. No wonder John McCain has that lizard-like face, he's a chameleon who changes his colors/views to suit the political environment that he finds himself in from day to day.

One of the main factors that led us into this stock market mess in the first place was the laissez-faire, Herbert Hoover business attitude of the Republican ruled White House and Congress for years. Deregulation of the financial sector has been a Republican wet dream for decades and was joyously enacted thanks to McCain supporters like Phil Gramm. Gramm by the way has been extremely influential in writing John McCain's economic policy. But McCain isn't blameless in this matter--in the least.

On the campaign trail on Monday, Mr. McCain, the Republican presidential nominee, struck a populist tone. Speaking in Florida, he said that the economy’s underlying fundamentals remained strong but were being threatened “because of the greed by some based in Wall Street and we have got to fix it.”

But his record on the issue, and the views of those he has always cited as his most influential advisers, suggest that he has never departed in any major way from his party’s embrace of deregulation and relying more on market forces than on the government to exert discipline.

While Mr. McCain has cited the need for additional oversight when it comes to specific situations, like the mortgage problems behind the current shocks on Wall Street, he has consistently characterized himself as fundamentally a deregulator and he has no history prior to the presidential campaign of advocating steps to tighten standards on investment firms.

TPJ: McCain's other financial "guru" and hero is Alan Greenspan the former Chairman of the Federal Reserve who is also a rabid deregulator. Barack Obama said of McCain yesterday:

“I certainly don’t fault Senator McCain for these problems, but I do fault the economic philosophy he subscribes to,” Mr. Obama told several hundred people who gathered for an outdoor rally in Grand Junction, Colo.

TPJ: Now Carly Fiorina is on MSNBC today lauding how John McCain recently spoke out on excessive CEO retirement packages and bonuses showing again the blatant hypocrisy and deceptiveness of the McCain campaign. Fiornia single-handedly destroyed Hewlett-Packard shipping thousands of jobs over-seas and when she was done she was given a handsome bonus and retirement package!!! Under Hewlett-Packard's severance agreement, Carly Fiorina received US$21 million in cash, which was 2.5 times her base annual salary.

And speaking of McCain's top economic adviser she said today that John McCain couldn't run a major corporation. So how is it then that McCain is qualified to set economic policy for the entire country? Also, you know how McCain is saying that he was "misinterpreted" with his comment yesterday that the fundamentals of our economy are sound? On the day that the DOW dropped 500 points? Well he has said that phrase at least 22 times on the campaign trail this year according to Hardball with Chis Matthews on MSNBC.

---End of Transmission---

John McCain and Privatizing Social Security. Plus, McCain Opposed Raising Minimum Wage 19 Times.

John McCain supports allowing some individuals to take their social security money and invest it in the stock market via so-called, "private investment accounts" that George W. Bush proposed:

In his new “economic plan,” McCain says that he “supports supplementing the current Social Security system with personal accounts – but not as a substitute for addressing benefit promises that cannot be kept.” But this contradicts what McCain told the Wall Street Journal last month:

Asked about the apparent change in position in the interview, Sen. McCain said he hadn’t made one. “I’m totally in favor of personal savings accounts,” he says. When reminded that his Web site says something different, he says he will change the Web site. (As of Sunday night, he hadn’t.) “As part of Social Security reform, I believe that private savings accounts are a part of it — along the lines that President Bush proposed.”

One of his top economic aides Carly Fiorina said in April, "He has on other occasions said that he supports private accounts as one of the ways to reform the system. But I think he, and I think he will continue to be supportive of those." McCain has consistently supported private accounts for several years. Including voting for the Bush private accounts plan that was roundly reject by a vast majority of Americans. There are several problems with that plan but I'll just name two: 1). Allowing people to take their money out of the system to invest in the market reduces the pool of people paying into the program and thus threatens benefits of those wanting to stay in the old system.

And 2). It is a risky "roll of the dice" plan that could see people losing their entire social security savings in a bad day or days of trading. Think how much money people would have lost yesterday with the 500 point drop if they had invested a chunk of their social security money in the stock market!!

John McCain's ideas on social security reform are reckless and risky. We all agree that social security needs to be reformed but encouraging people to invest that money in the volatile stock market is irresponsible leadership. Barack Obama said of McCain's openness to private accounts, "If John McCain lost his Social Security, he'd get by just fine. Would you?"

Plus, John McCain has Voted Against Raising the Minimum Wage 19 Times. In other economic news, NEW YORK - Goldman Sachs Group Inc., the larger of the nation's two remaining major independent investment banks, on Tuesday reported its worst slump in profits since going public in 1999. The world's largest investment bank reported third-quarter profit plunged 71 percent from the year-ago period, an almost unthinkable drop for a firm widely described as the smartest on Wall Street. Goldman's results reflect continuing damage from the ongoing credit crisis that has already vanquished three of its rivals.

---End of Transmission---

John McCain Clueless on the Economy--Still.

UPDATE: Wow. I got away for a few hours to watch a documentary on the Dalai Lama with my parents to find that the market dropped an additionial 200 points to end the day down 500!!!

Within less than an hour the stock market opened this morning with a 300 point drop and is now at about 280 points as I type this. This was in reaction to Lehman Brothers filing for bankruptcy and Merril Lynch & Co. being bought out. John McCain said "these are very, very difficult times." That's the understatement of the year. Yet went on to say that he still thinks (as of this morning) that the "fundamentals of the economy are sound." When long-time pillars of our economy such as Bear Sterns, Lehman Brothers, Merril Lynch and AIG are dropping like flies we are beyond difficult times, we are living in an economic emergency.

Fundamentals of the economy include jobs which are being lost at record numbers. It includes consumer confidence which is low with less people investing and buying goods and services. It also includes purchasing power which is much less with the declining value of the dollar. Another fundamental would be reduced debt and yet under the Bush/McCain policies of staying in Iraq and giving tax cuts to the rich we must continue to go into debt to pay for it all. Another fundamental is a strong middle class but because again McCain wants to continue the tax cuts to the rich the middle-class is continuing to shrink everyday.

So when I hear McCain saying that basically the fundamentals are sound I know that he's beyond out of touch. People are losing their home which is their biggest investment and meanwhile McCain basks in one of his 7 houses saying "it's not that bad." This is the same guy whose top economic adviser said no, we aren't in a recession but that it's a mental recession and that we're all just a bunch of whiners. And one of his other economic advisers is Carly Fiorina who single handedly destroyed Hewlett-Packard company resulting in thousands of job losses.

The crisis, which once seemed like a confusing Wall Street story, has reached a tipping point where Wall Street will visibly affect Main Street: Home buyers, consumers and entrepreneurs will have even more trouble getting credit, slowing the nation’s job machinery.

And it's not just partisan liberals who believe that we are in a catastrophic crisis, conservative economy guru Alan Greenspan said yesterday that this is, "The worst economy I've ever seen" and Greenspan has been around a while and knows a thing or two. His is a sobering view that goes way beyond a scenario where things are simply "difficult." As well as a statement that is in stark disagreeent with the McCain comments that our economy is still fundamentally sound.

John McCain has said that he wants to set up a special panel headed by Greenspan and yet despite his admiration for Greenspan, McCain apparently disagrees that this is the worst economy in a long while with this non-sense that the fundamentals of the economy are sound.

McCain claims that we need to reform the relaxed regulations (which we do) of these banks and mortgage companies and yet he was part of the problem leading up to this economic meltdown by voting against such regulation!!:

McCain Voted Against An Independent Regulatory Agency For Federal Home Loans. McCain voted against the Federal Housing Regulatory Reform Act which created an independent regulatory agency within the Department of Housing and Urban Development to oversee the activities of Federal National Mortgage Association and Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation. [1992 Senate Vote #137, 7/1/1992]

We can't afford more of the same punitive Bush economic policies that McCain would continue to prop up.

UPDATE: The McCain camp claims that what he was really saying by his statement that the fundamentals of the economy are sound was that the American workers still have a strong work ethic, productivity and ingenuity. I assume he's not talking about the unemployed workers who are apart of the record 6.1% unemployment rate? Which by the way was around 4% when Bush took office. When one traditionally speaks of the fundamentals of the economy they include more than just the work ethic of the American worker. I think most economists would agree that our economic fundamentals are also critical things like GDP rate, the strength of the dollar and the trade deficit to name a few.

But second, the American worker isn't fundamentally sound--not in the least!! The American worker today has to work more hours for less pay, get less for their dollar, pay more for less insurance, suffer pay-cuts and worry if they'll have a home to come back to after work.

---End of Transmission---