John McCain, in an interception of the statesman football from the Obama camp, decided to go one-up on Obama's proposal to issue a bipartisan statement together and suspend his campaign, including a proposal to postpone Friday night's debate. Of course the early reports were full of Republicans, including Orrin Hatch, extolling the virtues of "the John McCain I know," and lauding McCain's "statesmanship" -- until Camp Grumpy Grampy decided that the date of the Palin/Biden debate would be a dandy time in which to reschedule it.
Of course, who could blame Camp Grampy, when, having gone for the quick, cheap bounce by putting a preposterously unqualified and uninformed person on the ticket under the assumption that women would vote for her for just that reason, for trying to quash the obligation for Governor Talking Points to actually defend the nonsense that comes out of her mouth, especially when their prize pony shows up at an interview with Cupcake Katie Couric and comes out with stuff like this:
PALIN: My understanding is that Rick Davis recused himself from the dealings of the firm. I don't know how long ago, a year or two ago that he's not benefiting from that. And you know, I was--I would hope that's not the case.
COURIC: But he still has a stake in the company so isn't that a conflict of interest.
PALIN: Again, my understanding is that he recused himself from the dealings with Freddie and Fannie, any lobbying efforts on his part there. And I would hope that's the case because, as John McCain has been saying, and as I've been on a more local level been on a much more local level been also rallying against is the undue influence of lobbyists in public policy decisions being made.
and:
I'm ill about the position that America is in and that we have to look at a $700 billion bailout. At the same time we know that inaction is not an option and as Senator McCain has said unless this nearly trillion dollar bailout is what it may end up to be, unless there are amendments in Paulson's proposal, really I don't believe that Americans are going to support this and we will not support this. The interesting thing in the last couple of days that I have seen is that Americans are waiting to see what John McCain will do on this proposal. They're not waiting to see what Barack Obama is going to do. Is he going to do this and see what way the political wind's blowing. They're waiting to see if John McCain will be able to see these amendments implemented in Paulson's proposal.
COURIC: Why do you say that? Why are they waiting for John McCain and not Barack Obama?
PALIN: He's got the track record of the leadership qualities and the pragmatism that's needed at a crisis time like this.
COURIC: But polls have shown that Senator Obama has actually gotten a boost as a result of this latest crisis with more people feeling that he can handle the situation better than John McCain?
PALIN: I'm not looking at poll numbers. What I think Americans at the end of the day are going to be able to go back and look at track records and see who's more apt to be talking about solutions and wishing for and hoping for solutions for some opportunity to change, and who's actually done it?
COURIC: If this doesn't pass, do you think there's a risk of another Great Depression?
PALIN: Unfortunately, that is the road that America may find itself on. Not necessarily this as it's been proposed has to pass or we're going to find ourselves in another Great Depression. There has got to be action--bipartisan effort--Congress not pointing fingers at one another but finding the solution to this, taking action, and being serious about the reforms on Wall Street that are needed.
COURIC: Would you support a moratorium on foreclosures to help average Americans keep their homes?
PALIN: That's something that John McCain and I have both been discussing whether that is part of the solution or not...you know, it's going to be a multi-faceted that has to be found here.
COURIC: So you haven't decided whether you'll support it or not?
PALIN: I have not.
COURIC: What are the pros and cons of it do you think?
PALIN: Well, some decisions that have been made poorly should not be rewarded of course.
COURIC: By consumers, you're saying?
PALIN: Consumers and those who were predator lenders also. That's, you know, that has to be considered also. But again, it's got to be a comprehensive long term solution found for this problem that America is facing today. As I say, we are getting into crisis mode here.
Having a tough time blaming it all on the black people, eh, Governor? Don't you know that's your party's talking point these days?
Sarah Palin may be a very shrewd politician, but if she isn't just a nitwit with good political instincts, that means she's willfully and deliberately ignorant. And that disqualifies her from seeking the second-highest office in the country. Every time they put this woman in front of a camera without a script and without a wire feeding answers into her ear, she looks and sounds increasingly like this:
It's understandable that Camp Grampy would want to keep her away from a debate situation, particularly one with someone as ferociously smart as Joe Biden. But the efforts to keep her sequestered from the American people smack of the same arrogance that characterizes the Bush Administration.
Obama, to his credit, didn't take the bait. Joe Scarborough may be saying this morning that Obama should have said "Yes, John, that's a good idea, let's do it", but of course Joe Scarborough is one of the last bastions among the non-knee-jerk of McCain manlove. But even better than just Obama's refusal to take the bait was his framing of McCain's effort as not cowardice, but an inability to handle two tasks at once. Americans may be ill-informed, but they do know that a President must be able to juggle multiple crises, and perhaps the next president will be required to juggle more of them than some have been. So if John McCain, with 26 years of experience in Washington and a self-claimed specialization in foreign policy, can't handle a vote on the bailout and debate prep, perhaps he ought to rethink his ambitions. After all, most of us don't get everything we want in life.
Less intelligent, however, are Congressional Democrats, who are once again falling hook, line, and sinker for Republican fearmongering. Looking at the dynamic that's playing out in Washington, we now have conservative Republicans free to speak out against the plan to transfer $700 billion of American taxpayers' money into the pockets of Wall Street executives (including, presumably, Henry Paulson if he returns to Goldman Sachs after leaving Washington, given that Goldman stands to be a primary beneficiary of Washington's beneficence), while Democrats, once again too terrified of the consequences of "voting wrong", are taking the bait and planning to make a few compromises so they can vote for this monstrosity.
The potential damage to downticket races from the Democrats' capitulation is incalculable. Americans oppose this bailout 55%-31%, and the way it's playing out, Republicans in these downticket races will be able to make hay over the DEMOCRATS giving your tax dollars to wealthy Wall Street executives. I'm thinking in particularly about races like the Minnesota Senate race, in which Al Franken has pulled even with Norm Coleman. This is the sort of contest in which a perception of Democratic capitulation to an unpopular president could be devastating, even as said capitulation gives cover to conservative Republican incumbents.
The Democrats in Congress should look to their party's standard-bearer's comments yesterday to see how it's done:
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire