What’s more important — a debate or a financial crisis?
posted at 12:00 pm on September 26, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
I’m a little amused by the sudden priority of holding a presidential debate today, rather than have two Senators focus on an emerging national crisis that simply can’t be rescheduled. Earlier this week, Barack Obama described the credit meltdown as the worst financial crisis this nation has seen in almost eighty years, and demonstrated that he didn’t even begin to understand its origins:
They said they wanted to let the markets run free, and instead they let them run wild. And in doing so, they trampled on our core values of fairness, and balance, and responsibility to one another. And as a result, we are facing a financial crisis as profound as anything we have faced since the Great Depression.
Wrong. We’re in this crisis because government intervened to impose its ideas of “fairness”, “balance”, and “responsibility to one another”. Congress demanded that lenders lower requirements for borrowers and then mandated that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac buy the bad paper and resell them as securities in order to encourage overzealous risktaking. This is not a free-market failure, it’s a government-mandated collapse, thanks to a Congress that forced “fairness” over discipline and responsible lending. The fact that Obama to this moment still doesn’t understand that shows that he would not just repeat the same mistakes that led to the collapse, but would redouble efforts to mandate “fairness”, “balance”, and “responsibility to one another” — and lead us into the same trap all over again.
But even beyond that, Obama’s correct in noting the scope of this failure and the necessity of addressing it now. Given that, our Senators and Representatives should be on Capitol Hill, dealing with the most “profound” crisis since the Depression. Instead, Obama had to get dragged back to Washington and now wants to leave to hold a debate — on foreign policy. (I guess that beats working out at the gym.)
Putting aside partisan considerations at the moment, what should be the highest priority for our elected representatives at the moment? Dealing with an unfolding national crisis that Congress has to address, or flying out of town for a debate that could easily get rescheduled — and which has little value anyway?
In order to select the latter, one has to produce even one single tangible public benefit that results from holding a debate on this particular day that outweighs the need to address the biggest financial crisis in decades. That’s $700 billion taxpayer dollars at risk, as opposed to a debate on foreign policy from two candidates who have been talking about this subject at length for the last two years or more. What benefit from holding this debate tonight outweighs the need to oversee that kind of risk?
Ruben Navarette has similar thoughts:
Earlier this week, McCain abruptly suspended his campaign and requested that the debate be postponed until Congress finishes the heavy lifting of approving a bailout. That put Obama and McCain in a classic Mexican standoff with each trying to look presidential, while attempting to map out a course that would benefit him politically.
Some in the Obama-friendly media were quick to dismiss McCain’s move as a political stunt. I don’t know. It’s not like launching one’s candidacy in Springfield, Illinois, in the hopes of conjuring up comparisons to Abraham Lincoln, or moving one’s convention speech to a football stadium to accommodate a larger crowd.
The debates themselves are nothing more than political stunts. They pit two candidates against each other to discuss complicated issues, and give them each 120 seconds to discuss them. The debates exist to produce sound bites, not public policy. They’re a game show aimed at people who don’t pay attention to policy and make up their minds by determining who delivers the best comeback.
If the presidential race featured two Governors rather than two Senators, then the debate could go on. Governors would have no role in developing public policy to address the crisis. However, Senators already have a job in Washington, and actual policy should take priority over a television show, especially since we still have more than five weeks in which to reschedule it.
Barack Obama and John McCain already have jobs, and in a crisis, that’s where they should focus.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « 1 2 [3]
So you are saying taking action is the same as completing?
Minor details are being worked out, the wording is being worked out. It has been put to bed.
There are four people now hammering out the minor details.
By your foolish standard, you think he is saying not until the problem is resolved, which could take years…
You are very strange when you make a mistake…you have a difficult time facing that don’t you?
But you are right…you won’t understand the difference, liberals never do. They just think words can be twisted to fit their definition at the moment.
End of this subject, it take too much energy to show a liberal facts.
right2bright on September 26, 2008 at 2:27 PM
classic…
right2bright on September 26, 2008 at 2:29 PM
These people are not elitists, really — well, Peggy Noonan is. Kathleen Parker has major PDS going on; Palin is essentially her peer age-wise but is a lot more accomplished. Palin makes Parker look unimportant and Parker doesn’t like it. Heather MacDonald has some of the same thing going on, plus MacDonald doesn’t like Christianity. Dreher is just an environmental wacko with a steadily declining audience. And Peggy is, just …. in vain search of a coherent thought lately. Hillary might have made her happy.
BigD on September 26, 2008 at 2:37 PM
right2bright
The link you gave to prove that Reid summoned McCain says the opposite of what you say it does. You’re a bit of a snake (sorry, lying snake).
snaggletoothie on September 26, 2008 at 2:38 PM
In freshman English we learned to call that an “F”.
AubieJon on September 26, 2008 at 2:38 PM
Love the bit on your website that says “not as smart as he thinks he is”. Heh.
AubieJon on September 26, 2008 at 2:44 PM
Can o’ whuppass about to be opened on lil Barry.
Akzed on September 26, 2008 at 2:46 PM
It’easy because nobody is as smart as I think I am.
snaggletoothie on September 26, 2008 at 2:48 PM
This debate is a farce. I just listened to one of Obama’s foreign policy advisors lamenting that McCain is under pressure not to make a slip because it could be disastrous. They’re threatening McCain? Does that empty vessel Obama and his stooges really think they can frighten a man that has faced death more times than he can count. This is the first time in my 70+ years of life that I have witnessed a presidential election where one party ran a national hero and the other party ran leftist nothing.
rplat on September 26, 2008 at 2:53 PM
I think Sandra Smith would say a debate because the politicians won’t solve the financial crisis they helped create. The less they do, the better we will all be. Let the prices come down, let the free market work.
ThackerAgency on September 26, 2008 at 3:28 PM
Well, seeing as you called me a liar…let me pull the quote from the article…and then you can twist in the wind you little SOB, sorry stupid SOB.
As you can see the quote is in that article…
Next time read all the way through, instead of the first couple of sentences…that will help you understand what is written and save you the embarrassment of looking like the fool that you are.
right2bright on September 26, 2008 at 3:33 PM
Dubya could have made her very happy,..all she wanted was to be major speechwriter for him. He didn’t give her the nod and it’s been all downhill ever since. Notice how often she refers to Reagan’s great communication skills? She’s too coy to take direct credit, but will certainly bask in the comfort of reflected warmth.
a capella on September 26, 2008 at 3:44 PM
snaggletoothie, did you crawl back under your rock??
right2bright on September 26, 2008 at 3:52 PM
The Debate will only make things MORE partisan, the debate should have been rescheduled like McCain said.
Obama and his campaigns complaining about making the partisan debate go forward will hurt the economy.
Chakra Hammer on September 26, 2008 at 3:57 PM
Who said he would send troops into Pakistan without Musharraf’s permission? Oh, wait a minute, that wasn’t McCain.
Who said he would meet with Ahmadinejad without preconditions? Oh, wait, that wasn’t McCain.
Who tried to delay the withdrawal of troops from Iraq after saying he wanted to withdraw them all in 16 months? That wasn’t McCain either.
Who argued against the troop surge, then told O’Reilly it worked beyond his wildest dreams? Not McCain.
Sure…McCain is really afraid of a slip in a foreign-policy debate. What he needs to do is slam Obama on his derailing the bailout plan and his habitual lying.
Sheep to wolf: Watch out, I bite!
Steve Z on September 26, 2008 at 4:02 PM
Kathleen Parker is probably referring to Palin’s non-response to Couric’s question about a second example of when McCain bucked his party in the Senate. But Palin probably didn’t want to bring up amnesty or the McCain-Feingold bill, so maybe she looked silly there.
But then again, why didn’t Couric ask Joe Biden about HIS running mate’s accomplishments? Biden, despite his long experience in the Senate, would have been equally stumped, because there aren’t any!
Steve Z on September 26, 2008 at 4:07 PM
right2bright
You’ve misrepresented the article. The article said that Reid had not summoned McCain. Your quote is from an unfounded assertion of a McCain aide in response to the article. The link said the opposite of what you said it did. But sorry about calling you a snake. I went too far there and take the unfair accusation back.
snaggletoothie on September 26, 2008 at 4:29 PM
Thanks, but I never misrepresented the article, I stated that Reid back away from that, I don’t know have much clearer I can be then giving you a link and saying he backed away from that. BTW, Reid never denied saying that, if you want to believe Reid has honor above all, that’s your foolish right. But show me where Reid denied stating that…he won’t because they have it on tape. I think you stating that this “aide” who was Mike Salter a senior advisor, is underestimated. It was added as an update because Tapper meant to mislead (and obviously was successful because look at you), Salter set the record straight.
So once again, Reid and Pelosi knew they could not pass this without McCain’s blessing, right or wrong that shows the power of McCain, however Obama was never part of the mix, showing that he is just a puppet.
You see it your way, I see it mine…
right2bright on September 26, 2008 at 5:19 PM
It’s quitE possible that The “O” is so disorganized in his own mind….
This just might be a blow out….yea…under pressure…
jerrytbg on September 26, 2008 at 5:22 PM
According to the WSJ, the presence of the presidential candidates isn’t helping the overall process. With McCain and Obama out of town, the chances of a negotiated agreement being reached go up greatly.
From the WSJ:
At a Senate Republican meeting, some Republicans including Utah’s Robert Bennett, who had been a vocal supporter of the earlier tentative agreement, appeared unhappy. “They weren’t too happy with McCain,” said one aide to Sen. McCain, adding that there was some “grousing” that the candidate wasn’t fully embracing the emerging compromise.
Sen. McCain “goes to a meeting and all of a sudden, we lose all the Republicans who have been working with us for the last five days,” said Rep. Ellen Tauscher, a California Democrat. “This has to be a bipartisan deal. Unfortunately Republicans walked off the field.”
bayam on September 26, 2008 at 5:27 PM
The reason is that Democrats think the best Republican debater is an idiot even compared to the worst Democrat debater. Lefties can’t even imagine a Democrat losing honestly to a Republican.
Speedwagon82 on September 26, 2008 at 5:28 PM
I’d like to dedicate this performance of “Pressure”, by Billy Joel, to Senator Barack Obama:
Mary in LA on September 26, 2008 at 5:36 PM
I have a fresh bottle of bourbon and its time for the “Presidential Debate Drinking Game”! Every time McCain says “my friends”, slam one back! Every time Obama say “hope” or “change”, shooter time! I hope I don’t die from alcohol poisoning…
Wyznowski on September 26, 2008 at 5:51 PM
Looks like another good night to drink dinner- If I start now, maybe I can be passed out before it even starts.
anniekc on September 26, 2008 at 6:05 PM
dumb question: anyone know what time the debate is
ConservativePartyNow on September 26, 2008 at 6:16 PM
Quick! Barry Oh! says that the debate must go on…before he forgets the talking points that he has memorized. THE ONE forgets that McCain has had years of in-the-trenches experience honing his foreign policy philosophy. The boy wonder, on the other hand, has not been consistent, making it up as he goes along.
Barry Oh! found that it was a “distraction” to be called back to DC to meet over a pressing economic issue because his handlers– Pelosi, Reid, and Paulson aides– were doing the heavy lifting while Barry Oh! was phoning it in.
When THE ONE brought up the Republican alternatives with an eye to criticism, even though he was unfamiliar with the details, he just demonstrated once more how inept he would be in any negotiating role, much less one that demonstrates leadership. Moms Pelosi and Dad Reid let Junior head out onto a highway on his new bike sans training wheels, and Junior was a big FAIL.
Now, Barry Oh! wants to shine on the public in a debate with sound bites and baritone pseudo-gravitas while cameras record and flash because Rock Stars are only comfortable when there is adulation. (Look out: Chrissy Matthews may have to wear super-sized Depends® to contain his tingles.
onlineanalyst on September 26, 2008 at 6:27 PM
be back later, need trip to liquor store in able to get through this fiasco of fiddlers.
The History Professor was correct:
Wade on September 26, 2008 at 6:49 PM
Well said.
Mulligan on September 26, 2008 at 7:02 PM
Never have so few taken so many for so much.
Oddball: Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don’t you say something righteous and hopeful for a change? Crazy! I mean like so many positive waves maybe we can’t lose! You’re on!
Kelley’s Hero’s headlines tonight’s debate.
maverick muse on September 26, 2008 at 7:10 PM
What timing.
Call me cold hearted and callous.
Drudge is reporting Ted Kennedy was just taken by ambulance to the hospital.
One wonders what might come of something like this 90 minutes before a debate we were all hoping would get down and dirty.
One just wonders.
I can see it,, “Please,, in the spirit of love and mercy,, as our dear old Ted Kennedy struggles for the fight of his life,, can we all just get along tonight. Can we all just not bicker and fight,, can we all just remember Teddy and his poor dear family, at this dark, dark time.”
What timing.
Yes, I am cold, I know.
Nothing at all surprises me.
Nothing at all.
JellyToast on September 26, 2008 at 7:37 PM
IfWhen the debate starts going bad for the “O”, they’ll cut to Mass Gen…Is that what you’re sayin’ JellyToast?Shame on you…(sarc)
jerrytbg on September 26, 2008 at 7:44 PM
Comment pages: « 1 2 [3]