We’ve now got video from the front of that woman at the McCain rally on Friday. And this view makes it clear that while she said “Arab terrorist” in the subsequent interview, she clearly only said “Arab” on the stage with McCain …
Given the convergence between the polls and the calendar, the next logical move is for John McCain to start pulling out of blue states that John Kerry won in 2004 and make his stand exclusively on trying to hold the states President Bush won in 2004.
And this is where we could use your help. We’re picking up word of McCain ads drying up in states like Pennsylvania and contested states in the upper Midwest. But keep your eyes peeled and see if you see a change. And if you do, let us know.
So first it was the bold new economic proposals from McCain. Then that was called off. Then it was a bold new speech. Now we have late breaking news that the bold new economic proposals are back on.
In case you missed it over the weekend, a minister who gave the invocation at a McCain rally in Iowa couched his prayer in terms I’ve never heard before: God’s own reputation is at stake in this election, he said, because so many Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists around the world are praying for an Obama victory that if Obama wins, they’ll think “their god is bigger” than the Christian god.
It conjures up bad Japanese movies, or the fanciful musings of 10-year-old boys. Who would win between King Kong and Godzilla? Between Allah and Vishnu? Does the Christian god have an unfair advantage because he’s three in one? His “theological” take also suggests some influences from Greek mythology, but instead of angry gods hurling lightning bolts at one another, they’re trying to throw an election one way or the other, which is almost post-modern in its own way.
I’m just listening to John McCain be interviewed on CNN complaining about the coverage of the ugliness of his recent rallies and his own campaign’s campaign of character assassination of Barack Obama. Apparently all the criticism is outrageous and out of bounds and ‘not what America’s about’. Watching makes me actually wonder whether he doesn’t realize he’s simply lost all credibility on this issue.
From the Journal …
Then came the event in Wilmington, N.C., held at — irony alert!- Cape Fear Community College. McCain stood in front of the crowd and said he would take questions or comments after he delivered his remarks. He finished his prepared speech and tacked on a longtime stump story about the bracelet he wears. But then the music and handshaking began. No questions or comments to be heard–at least those directed at the senator. “I thought this was a town hall meeting?” a man asked the press corps.
Curious. And this isn’t a rhetorical question. Has McCain taken audience questions since the Obama/Arab question last week?
It turns out Krugman’s winning the Nobel was a very bad thing in as much as it’s cut down pretty dramatically on his economics blogging during these critical days. In any case, we now have a limited if not quite mini-bank recapitalization of $250 billion. But I’m curious to find out more about just how this is being organized. Yesterday Neel Kashkari, the guy Paulson’s put in charge of this whole operation, said “We are designing a standardized program to purchase equity in a broad array of financial institutions. As with the other programs, the equity purchase program will be voluntary and designed with attractive terms to encourage participation from healthy institutions. It will also encourage firms to raise new private capital to complement public capital.”
A couple questions. What kind of stock is the taxpayer getting? This strikes me as different from what they’re doing in the UK — and not as good a deal for the taxpayers. Second, a purely voluntary approach troubles to me. All things being equal, it would be nice for everything to be voluntary. But given the balance here between what secures the viability of individual institutions vs. what stabilizes the whole banking and credit system, I think this probably sets up some perverse game theory incentives. More to the point, the US taxpayer has no particular interest in saving individual institutions for their own sake. Taxpayers have a strong interest in stabilization the whole banking sector. And obviously the two are intrinsically connected. But given that priority I think the government needs to be more in the driver’s seat about the best strategic allocation of resources. Let’s be frank, even a lot of the ‘healthy’ institutions would likely go under, if we just let the market panic take its course. So for all of them beggars can’t be choosers.
Late Update: Two articles in the Post this morning suggest that while technically voluntary, the 9 national banks who will be getting half the money were told, in so many words, that it was an offer they could not refuse. That at least sounds like the USG is making the decisions about the best allocation of resources. But given that all of these banks, even the ‘healthy’ ones have been begging for and receiving immense taxpayer largesse over recent weeks, the suggestion of compulsion seems a bit overplayed.
Later Update: Post columnist Steven Pearlstein has an excellent column today basically arguing that it’s time for the Street to step up. Key passage …
“After yesterday’s “historic” meeting, we are told by industry apologists that we are supposed to be grateful to nine leading banks for having “volunteered” to accept additional capital from the Treasury, along with a government guarantee for newly issued bank debt, even if it means having to accept a dilution of existing shares and a few harmless restrictions on their operations.
Pardon me if I’m less than blown over by this munificent offer, but it hardly seems commensurate either with the severity of the current crisis or the depth of the banks’ culpability in fomenting it.
This is really key. The US taxpayer has put trillions (direct in the sense of the bailout, but also the money flooding out of the Fed) on the line to save these guys, because at some level we need to save them, or at least most of them, to save ourselves. And we’re supposed to be grateful they’re ‘accepting’ infusions of capital?