I can tell you 5 minute in an they have both already pissed my off.
Both spouting facts which were proven wrong after the 1st debate, an they still repeat them because they know most people won't know they are wrong.
Obama - tax cut for 95% is a lie
McCain - $700 billion sent outside the US for oil is a lie

I swear to god I'm seeing red right now





Fantastic question from the audience.
How can we trust either one of you when it was both parties which got us in the mess.
Obama ignored the question an blamed bush.
McCain did a little better but it was a perfect question for him.






so far obama has repeated 2 lies from the 1st debate
McCain has repeated 1





One issue Obama brought up which I do agree with is civil service.
The whole idea is contrary to my base conservative beliefs but I would completely support some form of near compulsory civil service.




McCain just caught up to Obama by repeating his 2 lie from the 1st debate.
But Obama retakes the lead by repeating the 95% tax lie for the 2nd time just in this debate.




Brokaw gets a cookie for holding both accountable to their time limits.




I did get a little laugh from McCain saying "I'll answer the question" in reference to Obama going off on a different subject.
I'm getting sick of McCain an his broken record "my friends"





Does this debate just suck more than normal. There is to little direct answers to the questions from either of them.






Both have again repeated more lies from the last debate. They do this because they think most people won't know the difference, what's really sad is they are right.

Amen.

And not just to that one comment. We need to force candidates to accept a more engaged format, and this should be something they have to agree to if they are going to run for office, not the other way around. Why the hell do they get to tell us how they will respond to our demands for debates?

We were drinking every time McCain said "my friends," it was the only way we could put up with it.

Robert you know after about 10 min.

I had to force myself to watch the rest of the debate if thats what we want to call this fiasco.

Neither One of these guys deserved to be president.I declare a "Tottal DO Over" get rid of these clowns and find someone more fitting for the job at hand!! And answer the damn questions for god sakes.

We need to throw out all of these politicians in the House,and the Senate as well.

All these so called intellectuals with thier PHD's and law degrees on the wall are the very people who got us into this mess.My garbage man could do a better job,atleast he' honest and hard working something these politicians know nothing about.

I know that the president can only ask the house and senate send me a bill and i'll sign it.If i wish too agree with that Bill.

However the problem is they will Never be able to get togehther in a TRUE sense of Bi partasanship.

The Dem's and the Repub's are killing this country and the middle class through greed and self serving intrest groups who finance there agenda..not the agenda of the People...sure they can point all they want at each other.. the he said she said BS dont pay my bills.

I've lost all Faith in our system of government, its to big and too corupted to work anymore..We The People are Screewwed.

I predict the I feel so fuzzy and good Obama will win this election..why because he comes across as the guy who is more likeable...Thats all not because he has ANY answers to are most important questions..McCain is perceived as a mean old man and keeps repeating himself over and over again..he seems just stuck in the mud...MY Friends..

You know I have had the pleasure of reading so many of your posts as well as Hamma's Blitz's Hellfire's Geno's and many others about the economy,the bail out,and other very important issues that face this country.

I have learned more here than you could Ever imagine.

And I thank you guys really for helping me understand the complicated issues at hand.

Now if we could just clean house,that would be a nice start...Don't bet on it though



"T.M."

Obviously they were both playing politics for the most part very indecisively and just trading blows -> Obama edged out clearly in my view with sounding more in command in his attacks, counter attacks, and in moving around the floor with vigour/authority.I'm not saying he wasn't blah-blah-ing, but he sounded/acted more less so than McCain imo.
Judging by post debate polling of viewers at the debate and in others, Obama overwhelmingly took in more independants while McCain lost some support from Republicans with his wishy-washy economy proposals.

For me though, McCain took a bloody beating and was in stunned-mode in the Afghanistan /Middle east wars segment.
Obama pummeled him very badly;

1., McCain stuck to his 'idea' the Surge would work in Afghanistan when in fact those tactics have been used there for the longest time already. He clearly hasn't been reading newspapers [like Palin] about it or any intel regarding operations there. The Afghan tribes are not divided into huge religious blocks like the Sunnis in Anbar,Iraq. Instead they are fragmented by allegiance and physical eremote distances -this is why the Taliban have an easy time screwing up the 'hearts and minds' model the Coalition strives to succeed with there. The remoteness of weak tribes -just like in real social life- prevent the weak from banding together to confront the larger bully - which the Sunnis could do in Anbar with their Awakening Councils. Also, unlike in Iraq, the US airforce have been destabilizing the situation to an extent by using very bad intel to launch air strikes on suspected terroriats - as a result very large numbers of civilians have been killed. Palin said it was a lie and McCain put out an attack ad calling the Dems raising that issue as dishonourable. Indeed at a rally yesterday in which Palin raised the issue she had incited some in her crowd to yell 'treachory' and 'kill him'! She of course kept smilimg and continued -> did I mention a while back she has a neocon streak in her?

2. Obama was correct in his call for more troops needed in Afghanistan - the Brit official opinion is to have less troops and set up a mini-dictatorship of sorts.... scrap domocracy. Bad idea imo. Extra troops should flood the borders with Pakistan and starve Talibans of support from there.

3. McCain referred to the Soviet invasion being repelled by Afghan freedom fighters. Again he shows he is in la-la land.
Soviets were beaten by Afghan rebels with the crucial support of Pakistan intelligence and the CIA funding and supplying arms to the rebels.
McCain conveniently leaves out the fact that the freedom fighters were in large part -> the Taliban, AND Bin Laden!!!
He goes on lying in saying the Taliban suddenly appeared and took over Afghanistan -when in fact the CIA wanted to see them in power with other Afghan tribes as a coalition governing Afghanistan. But Bin Laden paid off the Taliban to go it alone and rule Afghanistan as a tyranny. There's some evidence that the popular and brilliant Afghan Northern Alliance leader -Massoud -> commanding a small hold out of forces against the Taliban was assasinated just days before 9/11 with the help of Pakistan Intelligence -I remember seeing somewhere Massoud had some info that a huge attack by al quaeda was heading USAs way.
so let's be clear, McCain is skewering facts he should know as a commander-in-chief.

4.McCain was apparently busted open when the question was presented about what to do if Bin Laden was found to be in Pakistan, and the Pakistan govt. did nothing.

I'm surprised no one else caught that or think its important;
It's a situation which Bush has modelled most of his admin's initial success on; get Bin Laden -and its also an issue that could spark WW3.

McCain was caught out in the open stuck upto his knees in a bog. His policy is to not let Pakistan know the USA would [as Palin said] do everything necessary to get Bin Laden. However, the americans WANT to know what this very crucial reaction would be by both candidates. Obama clearly stated he would act to get Bin Laden. McCain replied with babbling with a nervous snicker that he thought it better to hold a big stick while talking quietly unlike Obama announcing without hesistation what he'd do. McCain knew he looked weak by trying to be subtle. He went on to lie that Obama said he would invade Pakistan to get Bin Laden!!! Obama NEVER said that - its obvious he meant -as he's stated in the past- to use predator drone air strikes to kill bin laden -or I would think otherwise the use of covert agents or less likely, special ops.
This is where Obama TOOK a decisive victory on the issue - he bullied Brokaw into allowing him to follow up on McCain's weak counter and further reasserted himself as being definitive on his policy. McCain clearly struggled and was lost for words when he in turn almost begged Brokaw for his turn at a follow-up-and when he got it, he could only appear to be in desparation claiming how he 'knows how to win wars' repeatedly.
Obama was sitting across from him with a big victory grin on his face during that episode.

5. Obama then busted McCain's knees when he caught McCain in his 'talk small , carry big stick' policy. He mentioned McCain's not so subtle stances on "bomb.bomb.bomb Iran", "next stop Baghdad", and obliterate N.Korea. McCain was at a loss on how to reply.

The one area McCain should've crushed Obama ended up being his Waterloo. But apparently, the Afghanistan phase doesn't matter so much because this morning the focus is on the economy -rightly so, but still - mcCain took the bad hit on foreign policy- AGAIN.

Guess who is reading this and just voted to crack open a beer.



That One !!!!! >>>>>>>>>>>>>

The questions
1) Whats the fastest solution to the bailout.
Both failed as they used this opening question for their stump speeches.
I think McCain stayed a little more on topic, then failed to explain his idea for using part of the bailout to buy homeowner mortgages. Could have been a good idea but failed to get the idea across.
2) How will the bailout help regular people
Obama was better on this question right up until he clouds the subject an basically lies about McCain.
Obama says McCain has always been for deregulation which caused the financial mess.
McCain's the one who co-sponsored a bill to increase regulation an oversight on F&F 3 years ago, it's part of the senate record. Obama then goes on to claim he's the one who really tried to prevent it because he wrote a letter addressing his concerns to Paulson an Bernanke. Sorry but I think that a cop-out. He wrote a letter???
Private citizens write letters to officials to voice their concerns. Obama is a member of congress, he could have done a hell of a lot more that right a letter. For instance, maybe introduce legislation, or did he forget he's a legislator.
Obama won on the initial answer to the question but totally failed when he tried to follow up.
3) How can we trust either of you when BOTH parties got us into this crisis.
Obama fails to answer the question, says you're right there is a lot of blame to go around, then does nothing but blame in on Bush. No doubt it was an effective answer considering Obama's strategy is to blame Bush an then compare Bush to McCain.
McCain did a much better job answering the question.
4) What sacrifices will you ask America citizens to make?
To me McCain clearly wins this question but the problem is he was honest. There are government programs we will have to cut ( we're broke, we have to cut spending or at least be more effective about it )
The bad thing is nobody wants to discuss this because talking about cutting government programs loses vote while talking about new government entitlements is a way to buy votes.
So while he was honest to admit this, it did zero to help him an probably hurt him.
Obama gave the typical politicians answer. Be smarter about how we use energy, then goes right back into more government subsidies, we're going to help you buy a more fuel efficient car, we're going to help you weather proof your house.
I really disagree with Obama's response during the follow up discussion. Goes on the attack about how McCain wants to give a big break to these corrupt CEO's by lowering the corp tax rate, It's plays into the anger everyone feels right now but cutting corp taxes goes way beyond helping Mr CEO, it will be the single quickest way to help recoup the losses by every American's 401k an retirement plan.
5) When will you reform Social Security and Medicare?
Obama refuses to answer the question, instead he repeats his lie about his tax plan an again attacks McCain taking advantage of the current anger at wall street to points his finger at McCain an labels his plan to cut corporate taxes as a tax break for CEO's
While McCain didn't offer a clear solution he at least responded to the question with possible ways to fix the problem.
McCain defiantly won this question.
6) How fast will you propose new environmental policy?
McCain offered a fair response as I agree with his energy plan more than Obama's.
Unfortunately this is a perfect question for Democrats an would probably score better with this regardless of his answer.
I don't agree with it but this one almost by default goes to Obama.
I also tend to agree more with McCain on the follow up question.
When it comes to developing clean energy, should be fund a Manhattan type project or 1000 garage style projects. I would lean more to McCain's answer by doing both. Start out with the Manhattan type to get the initial science out of the way, then hand the project over to the private sector to improve it.
7) Should health care be treated as a commodity?
Again neither person actually answered the question.
This is a hard one to judge, with fact checking both candidates lied on their answer. If you ignore they both lied an fail to answer the question, Obama offered the better fictional story.
The follow up discussion I would give to McCain but I'm sure must people would disagree with me.
"Is health care a privilege, right or responsibility"
I 100% agree with McCain's answer that it's a responsibility ( poor term but fairly accurate )
Because I disagree Obama's answer that it is a right. His answer was bogus because he says in a county as rich as ours we should be be able to supply health care to everyone.
Two problems, 1st it's not a right, 2nd our country is on the verge of economic collapse so I don't see how he can say in a country as rich as ours. We as a country need to learn some sense of financial responsibility. I believe the government is responsible for providing a safety net for those who can't do for themselves but I absolutely disagree with the idea of 100% government sponsored health care. If you want to know why just look at the $30 billion in Medicare fraud last year.
8) Will the economy affect America's role as peacemaker?
I think McCain wins this one. I'm sure Hamma/HF is going to roll his eyes on this one but I liked McCain's answer better. Obama did a good job using this to attack McCain, bad thing is he had to repeated a lie from the previous debate. ( the size of surplus in Iraq )
The follow up discussion was "What is the Obama Doctrine an what is the McCain Doctrine"
Obama offered a good answer, McCain failed to offer a direct answer, weak effort to attack Obama.
9) Should America pursue it's enemies in Pakistan?
Obama won this not because I agree with him but because McCain totally failed on his answer.
Obama also won the follow up, but barely
10) What will your strategy be in Afghanistan?
Tie on the answers, this would be one of the few questions where neither brought up previous debate lies.
11) How will you deal with Russia
Both gave reasonable answers
The follow up question was "Reagen called Russia an evil empire, under Putin would you agree. A yes or no answer please"
Obama gave a 20 second speech without really answering the question. McCain answered maybe.
I thought maybe was a great answer. McCain did go on to clarify his answer after the MOD asked.
12) Will you support Israel militarily if Iran attacks them?
Both offered good answers. This would be one of the rare occurrences when McCain really identified with the audience ( shaking hands with the petty officer )
I think McCain won this one on both sides, a better answer an a effective attack on Obama.
13) What don't you know an how will you learn it
While this was kind of a silly question, it's also what makes town hall style debates great.
I'm sure a lot of people liked Obama's answer but I hated it.
Talking about how he was so fortunate an wants those same great opportunities for todays young people. On the surface this sounds good but he then acts like America as the land of opportunity was lost because of Bush.
Sorry but to me it came across as America use to be good but now it no longer is.
I wish I could say I like McCain s answer better but I didn't .


Overall they both failed to answer the questions in a open, honest an direct way.
I disagree with Obama's platform on most topics so it makes it hard to be a fair but I tried my best. I would have to count this as an Obama win, not because I agree with him or he did better. It's a win for Obama because with McCain down by more than 5 points, anything less than a big win for McCain translates into a Obama win.


Thoughts, questions, comments?
Think I should switch careers or keep my day job?
LOL

Wow, phenomenal debate analysis, guys! Your insights are terrific, and a lot more balanced than some of the post debate discussions I saw last night.

Robert, I thought the question about health care being a right or a privilege was a fantastic question, and I would hope that this lousy debate will spark some national discussion over some of these issues. For instance, I'd love to learn more about McCain's plan to help homeowners as they face foreclosure. Certainly, we need a plan to keep honest people in their homes. There is no better solution to this crisis than to keep the homes out of foreclosure. This is what happened, in essence, during the Keating 5 - S&L crisis. I haven't studied that issue enough to speak in detail, but I do know the government held the paper long enough for real estate prices to rebound, and then they were able to recover their "losses." I don't believe they fixed the problem on a mortgage by mortgage basis, however. I worry that McCain's idea would be risky and very, very expensive and practically impossible to legislate something that would solve the problem on a per mortgage basis.

But, back to health care.

If you are driving down a busy street with your wife beside you and your kids in the back seat and suddenly another driver runs a red light and plows into your car, severely injuring everyone, I don't believe you would, at that very moment, feel that health care is a responsibility. You would rightfully expect the police, firefighters and paramedics to arrive, triage the scene, extract your family members from the car and race them to the hospital. If we were to live in a society where health care is a privilege, we'd expect those emergency workers to ascertain whether you had a policy that would properly cover your injuries before working to save your life, would you not? Isn't that a right as an American, as a human?

How about firefighting? That is certainly a right. If I accidentally light my house on fire, my taxes ensure that firefighters will arrive and put out the fire. I would expect nothing less. Some might say this is a public good, fighting the fire prevents the fire from spreading to another property. Well, what about an isolated rural house? Why not eliminate the fire departments in smaller towns that don't have connected structures? Sure as hell would save us billions in annual taxes.

We don't do that because the majority has decided that having fire protection is not a privilege given only to those who can afford it.

How is health care any different? If you have a decent job, I would expect that you feel health care is a right. Prisoners in the United States have a right to health care. Hell, even McCain has a right to health care because he has reached retirement age and he now can rely on Medicare. All of our retirees view health care as a right.

We certainly should view health care as a right and we should extend that right to all citizens.

Right now our country spends more on health care per person than any other nation in the world, but we consistently are ranked as one of the lowest in quality of care by the World Health Organization.

According to a recent Reuters story, American's are the least satisfied with their health care. The money quote in that article is: "Given that all countries other than the U.S. have universal health care systems in place, this may invite questions on why the U.S. remains the only wealthy, industrialized country without such a system," Harris president George Terhanian told Reuters.

Why indeed.

Well, I guess I was wrong. McCain's new housing proposal wasn't really a plan, it was all hat and no cattle.

Even the conservative National Review attacked him in an editorial today for putting forth such a weak-ass proposal. Others called it "half-baked", another stunt and yet another failed Hail Mary pass. His "new" plan obviously wasn't very important to the campaign as they did virtually nothing with it today. If it had been an honest plan, you would have seen them pushing it for maximum impact.

The National Review's editor's stated: "We never thought we would defend the Frank-Dodd legislation, which we bitterly opposed last summer. But it looks downright prudent compared to what McCain has proposed. McCain’s plan is a full bailout for lenders, and it cannot do much more than the Frank-Dodd bill without letting “ruthless borrowers” and other reckless types off the hook."

I can't wait for this election to get over so we can turn to solving these problems without the infusion of ridiculous presidential politics.

how can you help the homeowners who are foreclosing ? the banks are the only ones who can do that and they arent.im currently in short sale hell and let me tell you,the banks aint budging one fucking bit, because they know a bail out is coming.this is the truth here in florida as they will short sale the home but will negotiate very little ,infact in some cases they even take the difference of loss and expect them to pay that note as well.

another whole issue also is if you were an investor and not the primary resident ,if the short sale say a 1 million dllr home thats now worth 500k ,the IRS counts that 500k loss as taxable income towrds that seller. i think if theyre going to take our money to bail these crooked bankers out they should know where this money is going and have guidlines as to how the banks are dealing with the short sales and foreclosure.it just seems like every bank has their own rules.



wells fargo will not negotiate $1

bank of amarica makes you pay the difference

wakovia bought-tuff to get them to deal

wamu-same



wtf

I think the homeowners deserve a ton of the blame for this mess. How about some personal accountability?

Stop buying beer and porn and pay your frickin note.



p.s. Guess which clan turns one year old next week? That One !!!!!



- [BLAM]Shred and Burn

i wish it were that easy but between layoffs ,divorce and refis most these people ar in real trouble. as an agent,even if i get a buyer i have to REALLY INVESTIGATE the home they are buying because every one has shit going on. by the way,most homes in my area are near the million mark so imagine paying 45 k a year in taxes u lost your job and your wifes bangin the pool guy and wants a divorce.most homes on the market im finding leens but you really have to look so you dont look like an ahole at closing.



must be a little easier where your at.

People want to bash the banks balls, but the banks aren't the ones flaking on their agreement.

Its Joe asshole. Nubs who don't know finance. They just know that the Re-fi gets them a new four wheeler. Yee haaa. Hope that fucker keeps you warm at night. When you are snuggling up to ti it.

no your wrong blitzt, you have homes that were worth double and triple of what they are now,something has happend in the common home as i said above.the people are saying Fuck it im outta here cause i cant pay but when you try to sell it for the banks they still want the same price as owed. let me give you my take,i owned 3 homes,LUCKILY!!!!!!!! i sold them way back and didnt listin to my my wife but ill say with my current situation i wouldve been in the same boat. lets just say you buy one home though, at 650 k (normal) ,your making 150 k a year and perfect credit.then the market shits ,honestly the day after hur wilma here.your job cuts back and your sensing problems so you list the house,no showings for a year,then your wife leaves ,then you get laid off. you then get offers but the market vakue on your home is 280 k but the bank says go fuck your self bring me 650. in this aspect whos getting fucked? not the banks cause their getting bailed out but that poor dick is totally fucked with no credit and a foreclosure. i havent heard of one bank employeee getting fired because of any of these loans.





i blame them and these people are saying fuck it ill bankrupt. but even then the property is foreclosed and the homes arent at market value at all.

The following is a copy of what what I attempted to post on Friday when the server crashed in the middle of that process!!!! Luckily the post was still there for me to copy when I clicked the browser 'back' tab.




Maybe we need to fear not having day jobs?

A couple of months ago I made a HF prediction that a huge outside event would arrive and change an otherwise even race according to the candidates reaction to it. I wanted to say it was this economic crisis, but my feeling was whatever each would do would have no demonstrable impact on a resolution - and McCain screwed himself bigtime - he would've gotten away with the 'fundamentals / sound' line imo, but he had to swagger into Washington and annoint himself as a Messiah of Economics - as we saw the whole erratic pantomime crumbled around him since he was unable to sway his Repubs to act immediately and he realized a whole bunch of Conservatives saw him as a Pretender. In essence he reacted very badly - Obama on the otherhand had the idea he really could not realistically have an impact in whatever the House decided or rather didn't want to interfere to be viewed as playing politics in a very fragile situation.

We'll never know now if that extra week of voting delay that the monkeybrained Repubs and Dems who voted 'no' in the House would have eradicated the collapsing global markets -they were strenuously warned not to delay by the the world's financial experts, but the majority of the House Clowns played politics first -> Repubs listening to disenchanted phonecalls from their base over commonsense -and to his credit, McCain's efforts to push the unpopular yet needed stopgap measure at the critical moment- and then cowardly Dems fearing to be alone in passing the bill, voting in large numbers 'no' also - I'm wondering if Obama could have had some sway in trying to convince the Black caucus in the House to vote 'yes'.
So in relation to my 1st paragraph.... the leisure screw-ups in the House were the true screw-ups in this mess we are now seeing imploding horrifically imo.

Regarding Robert seeing which points I roll my eyes up at.......

A few - of course.....
Health Care
Many -as in the majority / particularly in the nations where it exists- would say Health care should be a right. Now would not be a good time to implement such a program. Obama needs to hit home how paying for such a program works. Up here in Canuckland, the people themselves directly pay into program through personal tax. The poorest 'segment' of society don't pay in this way. The not so well of pay very little- a few bucks for the year! As the income level rises, then so does the amount paid into the system -> it's not a devastating impact per household - the benefits are extraordinary- for one thing people requiring healthcare spend the money they save into the economy as opposed to large wads of their savings disappearing into buying medication/paying for hospital bills if their private insurance doesn't cover those costs. You can cry socialism, but we [+ other nations using such a system] cry 'thank god' -its not perfect in all cases, but typically it works well.
I think the overall work productivity in the economy gets a boost by universal health care - which means a better economic situation that reflects in a financial bonus for everyone in the end.


Afghanistan / Middle East
So we hear Palin that last couple of weeks sayin' her son is 'fighting for freedom in Iraq', sayin' 'there are no air attacks striking villagers in Afghanistan', and Cindy McCain pompously tearing down Obama for not voting to funding troops; and McCain declaring he knows how to win wars over and over in the debate yet offering absolutely no strategy on how.
I hardly think this is Obama barely winning in that argument on Pakistan- he destroyed McCain and sat there with a huge gloating grin on his face when he turned McCain's 'big stick-soft talk' back on him and left McCain stuttering gibberish for 10 seconds in the counter-counter follow-up.

Regarding follow-ups, Obama showed some aggressive tact in insisting on follow-ups even though he shouldn't have. He was showing fire and spirit and that he wasn't timid. McCain had to discouragingly play second fiddle to Obama everytime this was done.

The situation there is not like Iraq. It's much like the frontier Wild West. Unlike Iraqis, the Afghans are generally uneducated and tribal. The Surge worked together in Iraq because the locals collected themselves as a large entity and had enough common-sense to not be cowed by Al quaeda and to turn on them and then assist the Surge in succeeding. The Afghans are mostly not in cities and are disjointed and isolated - naturally the Taliban are free to roam and terrorize the villages and 'persuade' villagers to invest themselves heavily in the poppy trade to fund al quaeda and the Taliban operations.
Obama IS CORRECT - more troops are needed - at the borders and to protect the remote villages to ward of 'visiting' Talibans. The Surge idea will not work -the remoteness of regions does not allow a gradual advance+ hold strategy. Villages need a permanent protection force AND the Taliban to be wiped out or cut off at the Pakistan border. Otherwise it's going to be the same continual mickey-mouse crap for more years.
Another idea being considered by the Allies there is to buy the heroin produced by the villagers to starve the Taliban out of that huge drug income.
As for the silly McCainist attacks mentioned above; Palin needs to understand WHY the war in Iraq was started and is not about a fight for freedom and a heckler's right to protest / Palin needs to read newspapers or something to understand the huge lie she's telling about no air strikes being involved in killing ONLY Afghan villagers in large numbers and how those mistaken attacks are influencing antagonism to the Coalition there. Cindy McCain should point out how her dear hubby refused to support the latest GI Bill for the longest time even knowing how much it would benefit returning Iraqi/Afghanistan vets.McCain needs to start specifying how he knows wars are won - has he EVER stated such military strategies?

Anyway regarding the economic solutions I have more confidence in Obama since he ia a tactician and will pursue whatever the correct course is even going across the floor imo, even though McCain insists Obama'd never do it since he hasn't in his past..... but he did say 'that one' voted for a repub idea ---> another contradiction. I think we'll need to see how the European and asian markets recover to infuence American markets positively. The candidates are just playing politics -> were this race happening 2 years ago when the economy was flying high, McCain would've been praising deregulation for the boom and Obama would not be daring mentioning regulation on Wall st. I just us - we, you, me, political critics, some financial 'experts' on the side of hypocracy in the fact that in the times of boom we never threw out accusations of over-greed at exploiting Wall St. sharks - Some will say Bush admin tried to warn Barney 'Rubble' but let's see->The Bush admin who were mighty enough to engineer the unprovoked Iraq war, and successively override certain Constitution protections, finds themselves unable to do whatever they needed to to oust Barney Rubble if they KNEW a severe economic crunch was looming due to Barney's 'rolling dice' economic gambling schemes.

Why don't we simply say the truth -this is happening in the Bush admin's reign and the buck stops with him- bottom line - I think. When Wall st, regulations are exploitable and tons of money is to be had + when joe-blow gets credit opportunities to make him spend like good times will never end, it's natural most people will not have fears about bad times potentially just around the corner and everyone grabs what they can get at the time.... ultimately isn't it those we elect to be in charge making sure the s--t doesn't hit the fan... it's no good just warning about it, those in power need to act. Bush adds another 'sleeping at the wheel' episode to his legacy imo.....