Thursday, September 25, 2008

President Bush's Speech

Oh my gosh y'all! I am more confused than ever! Don't y'all have any experience explaining things to small children? That's what I need here! OY!

I watched President Bush's speech last night.


1. What do you think of his plan and what kind of ramifications do you think there will be for the next administration if it goes through?

2. What do you think about the McCain campaign suspending so McCain can go back to work until this is resolved?

3. What do you think about the idea of Palin taking McCain's place for the debate with Obama?


Two Dogs said...

1. Rewarding people for bad behavior is a bad idea. Why put off the inevitable? Rip the bandage off now.

2. I do not care. McCain is a bi-partisan idiot. I do not endorse him as my preferred candidate. I am conservative in all things dealing with the Fed. McCain going back to DC just increases the number of morons in DC by one. And if Barry does return, the number of morons increases exponentially, Barry defies the rules of mathematics.

3. Great idea. We can watch a moron debate Sarah Palin. Maybe Barry will add another day to his record of not getting his head stuck in a bucket and his one accomplishment in his life will continue.

4. What about Barry getting investigated for the 100k park in Englewood? Is it becoming increasingly obvious that the only reason that he is running for president is to keep from going to jail?

Roland's Link.

BLBeamer said...

1. The plan is so complex, and the issue so important, I have to rely on my philosophical underpinnings. Therefore, I must defer to those who have the knowledge and skill to yield an informed opinion. We amateurs have every right to express an opinion, but they are just that: the opinions of amateurs. My philosophy is that it is just as wrong to socialize personal losses as it is to socialize personal profits. I also believe that only the government could create a fiasco of this magnitude, so I am having difficulty drumming up a scenario where those most responsible for the mess are competent to clean it up. However, I defer to these esteemed academics who represent both left and right of the political spectrum. I am only familiar with a handful of them. Prof. Tabarrok is the one I am most familiar with.
2. I agree with Bill Clinton. It is nice to see a Senator take his responsibilities seriously for once. Is it a stunt on McCain's part? Maybe, but the fact that the increasingly unhinged David Letterman went off on McCain tells me that it may be an effective one.
3. Bad idea. It unnecessarily raises Palin and diminishes Obama. I can't believe Obama would go along with it.

Tom said...

1. While it kinda sucks that this sort of thing is necessary, I see the Paulson plan as the best way out a really bad situation. We're very close to the point where the credit markets lock up, and this seems like the only way to stop that happening.

And the credit markets locking up is a really bad thing. Great depression bad.

Thankfully, the numbers bandied about on TV aren't the whole story. While we will be spending $700B or more to buy these mortgage-backed securities, realize that they aren't really worthless. Most people pay their mortgages, and so most of what we by will pay the taxpayer back. How much is the question... but almost certainly the price will be less than that of the markets shutting down.

2. It's a relatively bold move, but I think it's the right one.

3. It would be funny to see, but I can't see Obama accepting that. There's no way he can win by debating Palin, and a lot of ways he can use.

Two Dogs said...

Oh, and one more thing about Obama debating Palin. If that is what is proposed, he can only avoid it by running back to DC to meet with Bush and lying to his supporters about that being more important to him while employing the Fannie Mae CEOs that absconded with the money. There is no possible way that Barry can get out of debating her that doesn't make him look like the moron that he is.

If he refuses, he continues to lose the intelligent female voters that he is losing in buckets. And if he accepts, Palin will make him look like the stuttering fool that he is. Our media has built Obama up just as they did with Al Gore and John Kerry. "He's a profound thinker and a policy wonk." Normal folks see Obama for what he is, a corrupt politician that is getting rich on the backs of really dumb people and that is destined to go to jail like all of the other politicians from Chicago.

Just saying.

One Salient Oversight said...

1. I didn't watch Bush's speech. He's not the mover and shaker behind The Big Bailout (TM) - Paulson and Bernanke are. The ramifications of this are huge - the bailout will substantially increase the already huge public debt burden. In order to pay for this debt (a process that will take a decade or more), government spending needs to be cut, which pretty much means that defense spending needs to be cut. An alternative is to increase taxes (a Market Capitalization tax, which taxes corporations according to their market value, is probably the best tax to institute here). To just keep borrowing and not find some way to pay for it is a recipe for disaster. A disastrous fall in the US Dollar is likely.

2. I don't think McCain's decision was very wise - in fact a lot of his decisions since Sarah Palin was selected have been quite strange and ultimately damaging to his candidacy. McCain's presence for The Big Bailout (TM) is not needed - both he and Obama are needed on the campaign trail to propose solutions. Whether they like it or not, the current economic crisis is a defining moment for their presidential campaigns since even I don't think Bush will mount a coup and install himself as president for life.

3. A Palin/Obama debate would be an insult to Obama and highlight even further the inexperience of Palin. I saw some of her interview with Katie Couric and she honestly looked confused. She might be good a making speeches but when "put on the spot" by questions she looks very ill at ease.

Two Dogs said...

The one thing that people forget to point out about Palin's supposed inexperience is that she has literally twice as much in governing than Obama. Why does everyone ignore that fact?

Personally having listened to minimally one hundred hours of Barry speeches, he impresses me as being as sharp as a bowling ball. Granted, Palin only sounds six times smarter than Barry, but that is certainly not saying much.

One Salient Oversight said...

Why does everyone ignore that fact?

We don't. We just know that "executive experience" worthy of presidential consideration shouldn't mainly consist of being a small town mayor.

In terms of legislative experience, Obama has been in the US Senate since 2004 and was a member of the Illinois Senate from 1997 until 2004.

Sarah Palin was on a city council from 1992 to 1996 and mayor from 1996 until 2002. Her tenure as Governor of Alaska started in 2006.

All credit to Palin for getting as far as she has, but I would personally prefer someone with experience in "bigger" levels of government. I'm not disparaging small town mayors here, but if that is the majority of a person's executive experience then I wouldn't think they were experienced enough.

Two Dogs said...

OSO, Barry Obama was in the US Senate for 141 DAYS when he started running for president. Sarah Palin was governor for 611 days when she was selected.

In Barry's 141 days of actually doing the job for which he was elected, he had his name on exactly ONE piece of legislation and that was to give money to the Sudan. Since the time that he started running for president, of course, Democrats have attached his name to everything that has been produced, yet he hasn't participated at all. Before Barry was elected as US Senator, he was a member of the most corrupt governing body in our country, the Illinois State Legislature. Barry has ZERO experience other than doing what Dick Durbin told him to do. Now, it is George Soros that is pulling his strings.

Barry's experience is not in the same realm as Sarah Palin's.

These are FACTS, everyone should know these things.

Two Dogs said...

And Obama has been in the US Senate since January 2005, not 2004.

Anonymous said...

Obama is simply the post turtle.

Google that.

Two Dogs said...

Here's a photo of a post turtle, you have to scroll down about a page, though.

Post turtle.

Sarah said...

Miss K, politicians are supposed to make things confusing so that you DON'T get involved. It's our unwritten pact. ;)

1. HUGE. Any form of government bailout is not only grossly unconstitutional, but will destroy our economy, credibility as a nation, etc.

2. Quite frankly... smells of a stunt to me. I don't think that McCain's heart is in the wrong place, but it certainly appears like that. But he did one heck of a job of making Obama look like a total dufus. Not that it's hard to do that... ;)

3. Would have made for a better debate. McCain's just not a public speaker. Although watching Obama's face when McCain pissed him off was priceless. :)

Two Dogs said...

The "Other Sarah" said a bad word! Do I get to say one now?

Sarah said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sarah said...

Weird, don't know why my last comment deleted itself. Anyways... it said:

hehe... I love how my name has suddenly become a bad word. ;)

Two Dogs said...

It wasn't your name that I was referring to, it was the bad word in your comment. I received a precautionary dressing down on my language and my overwhelming use of the dirty words before CB even asked me to comment on this blog, and danged if a fine, proper, young woman doesn't come in here and drive the comments into the cussing gutter. For shame.

Anyway, I was just funning you. But, I still want to dress this place up with some colorful language, what say ye, Coffee Bean?

Don't worry, I shall keep the drunken sailor talk to myself.

Sarah said...

hehe... :)