Did Andrea Mitchell just say about the news coverage of the financial crisis, “We shouldn’t be gaming it minute by minute?” Really?
I’ve watched the press parse, dissect, scrutinize, take apart and study every utterance by candidates and would be candidates for almost two years now. The press is openly driving this election. Its getting worse every election season. Remember the Dean scream? Was that, for even a millisecond a story? Sure, political oponents would surely exploit it, as would comedians, but, really, the “mainstream press” coverage of that went well beyond the pale. Ditto the lipstick on a pig non-story.
Well, this crisis cannot be overshadowed by stupidity and laziness. The issue must be covered in a frank and sober manner. For at least a week. I can guarantee you that neither candidate is going to say anything new until November. I could write their scripts myself, in advance, and there would only be a need for an ocassional tweaking to fit the crowd. The debates will tell us nothing. I swear to God, if i hear one more jerk-off reporter regurgitate the line “Obama must connect with the average voter” or “Obama must prove he is one of us” or some other variation, I’m going to put a contract out on his/her life.
Lets stay with this story, and as ever, follow the money. Or, you know, just cue the circus. Whatever.
19 responses so far ↓
The Missus // September 23, 2008 at 7:42 am
Yeah they talk about the many hurdles Obama has to jump during the debates, but what does McCain need too accomplish during the debates? Oddly the pundits don’t say much about what McCain needs to achieve during the debates. Maybe McCain is the new Fred Thompson, he just needs to stay awake on stage, good thing he will be napping just before the debate starts.
bridgett // September 23, 2008 at 8:39 am
Andrea Mitchell is married to Alan Greenspan. I am not sure why she is still permitted to cover the financial sector at a time like this.
Wouldn’t it be a real show of leadership if both of them would get off the campaign bus and get back in the Congress where we could use some leadership right about now? I’d like to see some of the bipartisan “moving forward together to do the difficult things that need doing” out of either of them. Ain’t going to happen, but imagine the effect on national politics if they did something so astounding like doing the job that they are getting paid to do.
nm // September 23, 2008 at 9:08 am
I was gonna suggest that Mitchell being married to Greenspan might have made her a little bit aware that Congress and the administration might like to have a little quiet space to actually, you know, get the work done. I don’t think she’s saying that the story shouldn’t be reported in depth and with full detail, but that she’s aware that obsessive minute-by-minute parsing may be destructive. As, of course, it is. Funny how that doesn’t bother her when it’s not her husband’s legacy on the line, say, with our entire political process.
democommie // September 23, 2008 at 11:21 am
Alan Greenspan is, apparently, not the financial and economic genius he has been touted as being.
Andrea Mitchell stopped being a genuine reporter a long, long time ago.
Getting O’bama and McCain off the circuit to actually do some work? Bridgett, you have such a delicate sense of humor! Meantime Sarah Palin’s handlers have said that no reporters will be allowed to sit in on her meetings with “world leaders” at the UN, today. Transparency is apparently a new “four letter” word.
nm // September 23, 2008 at 12:16 pm
That didn’t work too well: http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/23/media-rebellion-over-palin-photo-ops/?hp
Exador // September 24, 2008 at 7:13 am
McCain is an idiot for not screaming this from the hilltops.
This financhial boondoggle can be squarely placed at the feet of democrats and ACORN, of which Obama is an old friend, and other “community activists”.
Start with the Community Reinvestment Act, leading to the securities that fanny and freddie buried themselves in, then go to 2005, when fannie and freddie were on the verge of collapse. Greenspan tells congress:
If Fannie and Freddie “continue to grow, continue to have the low capital that they have, continue to engage in the dynamic hedging of their portfolios, which they need to do for interest rate risk aversion, they potentially create ever-growing potential systemic risk down the road,” he said. “We are placing the total financial system of the future at a substantial risk.”
This led congress to pass a fannie and freddie reform bill, S190, by the Senate Banking Committee.
The bill gave a regulator power to crack down, and would have required the companies to eliminate their investments in risky assets.
But the bill didn’t become law, for a simple reason: Democrats opposed it on a party-line vote in the committee.
S190 was cosponsored by John McCain.
Obama and Hillary Clinton voted it down.
Mr. Mack // September 24, 2008 at 7:41 am
You’re days late with that dumbshit wingnut meme, EX. It’s already been laughed out of court.
But, I pray McCain does scream that from the rooftops. It would end up causing an Obama landslide.
Exador // September 24, 2008 at 10:07 am
Perhaps I’m not receiving the same messages from Xenu that you on-the-left types are getting.
The Missus // September 24, 2008 at 11:24 am
S190 never made it out of committee, so it was never voted on by the full Senate.
Exador // September 24, 2008 at 2:52 pm
Quite right. It was killed in the Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs.
Killed by democrats, in committee.
jim voorhies // September 24, 2008 at 3:15 pm
Why do people expect Congress to be useful, despite centuries of evidence to the contrary?
The Missus // September 24, 2008 at 4:08 pm
No it wasn’t killed by Dems in committee. Republicans had the majority at the time 2005, that means the all committees were chaired by republicans and had more republicans than dems on each committee.
nm // September 24, 2008 at 5:47 pm
In fact, didn’t they they have a Republican supermajority on all Congressional committees? IIRC, there was concern that if they stuck with the more traditional committee majorities, there might be the danger that some Republican might sometimes side with the Democrats on a committee, but the supermajority made that far less likely to derail Republican-initiated legislation or to enable Democratic-nitiated legislation.
Exador // September 25, 2008 at 5:56 am
True again, but it was (almost) a party line vote in committee. I can’t remember who the repub defectors were.
nm // September 25, 2008 at 1:01 pm
Oh, Ex … http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/mccain-has-introduced-no-banking-bill-this-congress-2008-09-25.html
democommie // September 26, 2008 at 6:43 am
Exador:
“McCain is an idiot”
Finally, something we can ALL agree on.
Here’s a terrific MPalincCain ad.
http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1831461
Exador // September 26, 2008 at 6:44 am
Obama’s legislation calls for bolstering housing assistance for veterans, amending the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 to provide shareholders with an advisory vote on executive compensation, halting mortgage transactions that promote fraud, authorizing local and state governments to crack down on companies that invest in Iran’s energy sector and authorizing a pilot program to prevent at-risk veterans from becoming homeless.
Whoop dee do.
nm // September 26, 2008 at 10:29 am
Whereas McCain’s legislation … wait, McCain didn’t initiate any.
democommie // September 26, 2008 at 5:09 pm
The GOP, the party of fiscal responsibility, controlled congress for 6 years and did nothing to prevent the run up to this situation. For them to act as if they’re the “mavericks” on this bailout proposal is obscene–and typical behavior for them.