dotCommonweal

A blog by the magazine's editors and contributors

.

Delay of game. (updated)

Obama calls McCain this morning to see if they can hammer out a joint statement on bailout principles. McCain returns call to accept the offer, then announces he will suspend his campaign tomorrow to focus on the crisis in Washington, urges Obama to do the same, and asks that Friday's debate be postponed.Read all about it.P.S. Could we postpone the veep debate, too? Thanks.

Comments

Commenting Guidelines

I don't know how others perceive this, but the first thing that came to my mind was Jimmy Carter's rose garden strategy. It didn't work out so well for him. The second thing I thought of was Jackie Kennedy going through with John John's birthday party the day after her husband died. McCain makes it seem as if the campaign is, in comparison, a frivolous exercise. But a campaign isn't just about the interests of the candidates in winning, it's about informing the American people. It's not like anyone is going to suspend the election, ARE THEY????

No election delay ... yet. We'll have to wait for the October Surprise. Let's see: bomb, bomb Iran? Major disaster in Afghanistan? More economic disasters? Time will tell, kiddies. Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean that the SOBs are out to get you ... remember that.

Its not like anyone is going to suspend the election, ARE THEY????Yikes. Let's not even go there. I'm already scared :-(Re: McCain: I'd say it's 35% genuine statesmanship, 65% election stunt-pulling.

I could do without ALL of the campaign ads, since they're mostly exaggerations, distortions, sweeping generalities and outright lies. But my first thought was that McCain wants to opt out of the debates to use the time to get the GOP organized behind some kind of bailout plan that looks maverick enough to independents, but substantial enough to reassure the Republican base (i.e., the guys who run corporations) that they can count on him.

Let's see. On Sunday McCain was saying the economy is fundamentally sound. Today he's saying he has to go to Washington to save the economy. Somebody said this is McCain leading the cavalry charge. Maybe it's the Teddy Roosevelt influence. Chaaaaaarge!!!!The man is given to grand and senseless gestures

McCain's not kidding about suspending the campaign. He canceled on Letterman.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjkCrfylq-E&eurl=(Long, but worth watching in full.)

Question: Why are people still calling this a bailout o the investment banks? They are going to lose hundreds of billions aren't they? And at best most of them will be at best crippled financially? And aren't the homebuyers the ones that are now being bailed out by the government? I'm really proud of what the Democrats have insisted on -- saving the homes for the homebuyers. If that were better understood maybe there wouldn't be so much anger against "the bailout of Wall Street".

"Question: Why are people still calling this a bailout o the investment banks?"I guess because the money is directed at them, in some way, shape or form.Re: who "wins", this article in the WSJ suggests that the government could win, unbelievably huge-time. I'm not enough of a hedge-fund maven to understand more than about 75% of it, but I followed the general argument, and if this guy has it right, then it could be a windfall for the gov't.http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122230704116773989.html

Thanks, Jim. I was assuming that the mortgages were worth next to nothing. There is another informativee article in the New York Times about this subject. It's a bit more intelligible to an ignoramus like me. At: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/25/business/25value.html

Do you REALLY think that hedge funds, private investors a la Warren Buffett, etc. will actually allow this to be a big win for the (not government, folks ...) US taxpayers? When this is all over we will find out that, once again, those regulating and running our government are not either objective or intelligent enough to prevent end runs and just plain old fashioned snookering of the taxpayers. BTW, note that Buffett has supported the bailout, but, in his $5 billion loan to Goldman Sachs has resulted in a much better deal to him than will result to the taxpayers. As noted in the Times today: Mr. Bernanke pointed out Wednesday that Mr. Buffett had urged Congress to pass the CURRENT (emphasis of J. Mac) bailout plan. Id point out that Mr. Buffett drove a harder bargain when his own money was on the line. (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/25/business/25leonhardt.html?scp=4&sq=war...)

Thanks, Ann and Jim.Strikes me that this is the pivot point of the whole deal. "A big challenge for Treasury officials will be deciding whether to buy the troubled investments near the values at which the banks hold them on their books. That would help minimize losses for financial institutions. Driving a hard bargain, however, would protect taxpayers."