neither of them have a clue about the bailout. in fact I don't think there's anyone in congress or the white house that does.

IMHO, the bailout as originally proposed is a disaster.

But I don't think these guys were really there to focus on the economy which is what we all did want to hear about.

other than the 1st series which dealt on the bailout to which neither answered the question, I think McCain held his own which is an advantage against Obama.

Sadly, as it has been for so many elections, it always comes down to the less of two evils.

Even if either one of them could talk in detail about the bailout it would come across as boringly wonky. The hypothetical answer I give in the post is about the crisis but not the bailout. It would have fit in McCain's narrative about straight talk (plenty of blame to go around) it would have fit his narrative about bipartisanship (we can't play the blame game and need to work together) and it would have satisfied common sense conservatives and painted Obama as an old-fashioned liberal who has more "great" ideas like Fannie and Freddie.

Interestingly enough, fact check called out obama for his mistatement and published this which speaks of the 1999 repeal of Glass Steagal by Clinton and a bipartisan congress which included Biden, Dodd, and the other libs behind Obama. McCain did not vote for the bill.

I did a paper in economics on the act back in the 1980's and I myself concluded that the banks and brokerages should not mix. Sadly I was right. Here is what fact check notes:

"Some of the abuses that occurred stemmed from the 1999 repeal of a Depression-era law that separated banks from brokerages. In legislation supported by former President Clinton and Robert Rubin, now a top Obama adviser and Treasury secretary in the Clinton administration, this separation was ended — allowing banks and insurance companies to sell securities.

But while regular banks were strictly regulated by the government, Wall Street banks and other non-bank institutions — many of the same institutions whose abuses led to the current crisis — were allowed to operate with less regulation."

McCain would never attack a Dem the way we would. That, unfortunately, is his style.

You're very right George.

I don't think what I suggested is an attack on Democrats. It's a defense of Republicans which is much different.

Henry, I'm not with you on this one. We have PLENTY to throw at them and we don't because we -- and using the royal "we" here -- do not want to appear aggressive. If McCain had fired the double-salvos of the failure of Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac and tied it directly to the Democrats' refusal to reform it in 2005 (with a law he co-sponsored) he would have made a lot of points. He didin't. Doens't change the truth, but the libs will just yell, "Obama! Obama!" until they collapse in their fantasy ecstasy.

You're not following my logic. I agree that McCain would never do what you suggest. But what I suggested fits perfectly into his narrative and paints Obama as the partisan one but at the same time defends conservative principles.

Okay, I get it now. Yes, that would work. Then follow it with a full balls-on attack like mine! :-)

Obama won hands down. McCain should've blown Obama out of the water, but all he was able to do was to keep him subdued. I'm a Republican and I feel like McCain was an old fool who couldn't stand on his own turf. McCain scared me when he smiled, he looked like Frankenstein. Obama is younger and can obviously handle a little bit of stress, why couldn't McCain look at Obama?????

Why hasn't everybody rattled their Congressman's chain like this:

http://tomasestradapalma4today.blogspot.com/2008/09/my-most-recent-letter-to-steny-stooge.html

I'm really having a wonderful time. I've waited 30 years with Ron Paul for the Federal Reserve Banksters to destroy our economy while they get their stooges like Steny Hoyer, Paulson the Plunger or Bernake the Snakey to do their shilling for them blaming their unconstitutional counterfeit currency damage on everything under the sun except they the guilty banksters. This is my duty as an American to defend my country even when so many of my countrymen remain duped to this reality. Still...I'm going to has some fun with it. Please forgive me.

Melquiades Hof,

I'm calling bullshit right here on your claim to be a Republican.

I agree with Henry. Maybe Melquiades, with that gay ass name, likes to look at Obama too much! I'll tell you why McCain won't look at Obama in the face! Because these Muslim extremists won't look at women in the face, and McCain, who is a national war HERO and champion for women (PALIN '12!)...a radical extremist like Nobama doesn't deserve to be looked in the eye by John McCain! Ese negro cambiao por mierde se pierde el embalse y un 20 porciento!

LOL!!!

I don't think McCain did that well. There were many opportunities for him to really hit it out of the park and he didn't. He was far too nice. It annoys me that he is nicer to democrats than he is to members of his own party.

Obama, on the other hand, was insipid at best. He bold faced lied a couple of times too. He was condescending to a fellow senator who is not only a senior senator but his elder. If only for his age McCain deserved more respect from Obama and should have been addressed as and referred to as "Senator McCain" not "John."

Neither of these men will do what is right for the economy. Sorry to say but it is true. Obama wants to tax those who create jobs and McCain doesn't want to cut taxes enough.

I believe that the Fair Tax would solve all the problems but congressmen are too addicted to the power of taxation.

Henry, I agree with you 100%. That was a BIG missed oppty even as I was yelling it at the TV and my best friend was texting me that Obama was wrong.

Hopefully, someone will let him know, so he can address this in future debates.

Just a little known fact about fractional reserve banking and fiat currency. If I figured out a way to double the production of gasoline or tripled the number oil wells in the ocean (something we certainly should try to do by the way) all this would do is permit the Federal Reserve private international bankers to print up just that much more of the unconstitutional faux money - and we're right back where we started again.

The banksters pump in lots of Federal Reserve notes which drives up the stuff we just love to borrow to purchase like houses, cars and other big ticket items.

Once the banksters feel the economy has been saturated with enough credit obligations, the bankers sell their assets at the peak of this boom cycle they cause using manipulation of the quantity of money in circulation. Then they restrict credit availability in any number of ways like raising lending standards or upping the interest rate like Volcker after the bankster downturn of the 70s.

Then the supply of money begins to drop, businesses close, people lose their jobs followed by their homes to those very same Federal Reserve banksters that secretly caused the problem.

Most everybody else is a bit luckier and keep their jobs and homes but the mortgage is still priced near or at the peak of the money supply boom price. This is great for the Fed banksters since this deflationary period they caused makes prices for everything drop. So the banksters have lowered their costs while increasing income. That's because the weakest are foreclosed and the bank grabs the property cheap to resell when the market turns around once they begin rolling the money presses on high.

Of course the luckiest individuals not criminally involved with the Federal Reserve are folks like Tomas here. Since I understand the system and the timing, besides warning my amigos since way last year, I was renting. That is until now. The housing market will continue down perhaps as much as half itself again or more. But Deni and I got this house cheap enough, with like $80 down and a great fixed rate in a nice neighborhood a block and a half from the water. They paid all costs and our housing costs are fixed now.

Actually, they would drop to zero just like yours would if we abolished the illegal Federal Reserve Board. That's because your local banker or mortgage company would have no entity to pay the money back that they borrowed for your loan. These banksters would be in jail doing long prison terms. So their would be no fiscal or fair reason for you to have to pay back your obligation to them. Best of all families don't get kicked into the street like is happening now and sure to accelerate drastically next year and beyond. Even with no job they could survive, but not without a house. Kids without homes. Way to go banksters.

Without having to pay our illegal contract we would have lots more money to...put into the local banks! I have one smart fellow who has figured out how to convert your increasingly worthless Federal Reserve notes into gold and silver based money which would really help the local banks.

The above is the REAL homeowner rescue plan. What McCain and Obama spoke about last night I take it was their vision on which bankster bailout they liked best. The above absolute truths will not be televised nor debated by the two main party candidates.

They screwed it up this time and printed way too much money up. They know this and depend on most Americans being ignorant of these facts. I was happy to see some of the dialog here about the Fed. Word is getting out.

But these international banksters are going out with a bang. That's for sure. You can't solve the underlying problem of printing up too much counterfeit money by printing up even more of it and giving it to the creeps printing the money.

I'm sorry but economics just doesn't work that way or Zimbabwe would be the richest nation in the Milky Way. There is no disagreement among honest experts in this fiasco. It is obvious they are making the last big grab before the economic ship goes down. After that who knows what going to happen when millions of angry, desperate Americans finally realize they have been suckered.

What was it again Obama and McCain said they were going to do about the Federal Reserve? Sorry but I missed the debate because I had to work.