Yep, it is the economy. The economy is the reason why John McCain and clueless Sarah Palin are swirling in the bowl enroute to being flushed on November 4.

It's also the reason McClintock is attacking Charlie Brown like there is no tomorrow. You see, McClintock hasn't even troubled himself to write down what he would do about the current economic mess.

That's right. Nothing in writing except this (which dates back to early this summer, at least) from Tom's lightweight "Issues" page:

________________________________________

Bring fiscal sanity back to the federal government

The fiscal problems that we experience here in California are only magnified in the federal budget. The common sense proposals that I have proposed here in California will have a tremendous impact on reducing the size of the federal government and increasing its efficiency. We need to implement a federal spending limit and to cut out all of the waste and mismanagement of the federal government.
_________________________________________

Listen to McClintock's piece on Armstrong & Getty from his campaign web site. It's the only place on the site where Tom says anything at all about the current crisis. What do you hear? Criticism and smug comments. Quotes from Benjamin Franklin. But NO PLAN for what to do about it. Yeah, Tom is full of criticisms about the bailout but AWOL on an alternative plan that he can show will work.

Meanwhile, Charlie Brown, who isn't stuck firmly in the past like Mr. McClintock, has published a detailed American Jobs economic plan. McClintock can't be bothered. He expects to win this race through sleazy attacks and by sounding good whiloe saying nothing on the radio.

I guess it's a good thing McClintock still has his 2010 statewide race committee accounts open. He is going to need them.

Bob

Bob,

Let me see if I can explain this in English so you will understand:

BOTH Charlie and Tom SAY they will cut taxes and balance the budget.

Tom has a history of cutting taxes [IE the car tax] and votes against budgets that are not balanced even when supported by his own party.

Charlie has no record of cutting taxes, and is suspect when other plans on his web site suggest massive tax increases.

Charlie went along with the bail-out because Pelosi said it was a good thing, so I assume she can get him to vote for unbalanced budgets as well.

As to Charlies "detailed" jobs plan, most of his points ADD to government spending which makes it impossible for him to keep the two promises that he stole from Tom!

John

Bob,

You are a clueless fool! Charlie’s support of the failed bailout package will help bankrupt the government and many families. His policy of tightening the money supply is the biggest mistake that could be made. Charlie doesn't know anything about the issue or the market. He has no experience and just parrots the DCCC talking points.

FYI- I was one of the older gentlemen attending the debate this morning- Charlie was mister No answer regarding the financial issues. Tom gave specific after specific and Charlie stood up there stuttering on not making any sense.

Charlie is a Liberal Liar and Absolutely clueless about the economy. I would rather trust the judgment of an 18-year-old buck private over Charlie’s incompetence (The buck private might study and learn something- Charlie is too stupid!)

PS What has the market done since those fools passed the bailout- right now Dow down 298 points! Since the much vaulted bailout and the massive debt passed on to American Families the market has lost over 1500 points.

Charlie you are a Moron and you don’t deserve a single vote!

Jimmy,

I heard that Charlie went back to arguing that he did NOT wear his uniform at the anti-war rally where they hung the US soldier in effigy... It that true??

If it is Bob or Lee need to let Charlie know that we have pictures and that folks can clearly see it is his uniform!

John

Jimmy - the Dow dropped another 600 points. The Democrat solution: Raise taxes and blame Bush.

Nice.

WSJ, Today...

Economists Expect U.S. Crisis to Deepen

The U.S. economy has sunk into a recession and government action is critical to stem the damage, according to economists in the latest Wall Street Journal forecasting survey.

We're in the middle of a very dark tunnel," said Brian Fabbri of BNP Paribas, referring to the worsening credit crunch. "Each day we see another crack in the system."

Those cracks are quickly adding up. On average, the 52 economists surveyed now expect gross domestic product to contract in the third and fourth quarters of this year, as well as the first quarter of 2009.

This is the first time that survey forecasts for those periods have turned negative. If those predictions bear out, it would mark the first time U.S. GDP—the total value of goods and services produced—has contracted for three consecutive quarters in more than a half century. Economists put the odds of recession in the next 12 months at 89%, up from 60% in last month's survey.

It is a challenging scenario for the next president, as the election moves into the home stretch. Either Sen. John McCain or Sen. Barack Obama likely will face an economy in the midst of recession on Inauguration Day, even if the credit crisis begins to ease. The new administration will have to get up to speed quickly, taking over the largest government intervention since the Great Depression.

We're heading into recession and John thinks it's important to talk about cammie shirts and boonie hats. He thinks the voters give a rip about that, too. My 401K is down $85,000 since September 1. I don't know about John but that is much more important to me than any wedge issue McClintock might dream up.

Anybody wonder why the Republican Party is so dazed and confused?

Bob

Bob,

Voters care when people disrespect the troops. Voters care when someone has the poor judgment to lie about it later. That's what John thinks it's important to talk about.

Yeah, a wedge issue called character.

Hector

"Bob" - I really appreciated seeing inside an empty head with your last comment.

You are in the unenviable position of defending the indefensible.

The major issues of the day are energy and the economy. Right? Brown parrots Pelosi because he has no experience of his own.

You try in vain to minimize the effigy - it is critical to understanding Charlie Brown. What the man does when he thinks no one is looking is a KEY barometer into his future behavior.

So yes - the BDU uniform is critical to understanding what Charlie will do with the economy and energy... He will run hard left when he thinks people are not paying attention.

Meantime - I understand that Your Boy lollypop has been spending a little time on the phone with people he'd rather not be talking to.

Damn, I told you Shylock should have been the man.

We have Bill George - I guess you will need to get another 10-15 of Captain Lollypop's friends to come over from New Hampshire to make it a fair fight.

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=xtXN_EHPwSg

Hmmmmm

Guess what we will talking about at a 9 person dinner party this
evening up near New Castle. I'll be keeping my ears cocked for any references to Charlie disrespecting the troops. There may be an inquiry or two about Carole and my troop which Charlie respects.

I think there certainly will be some expressed angst about the global financial meltdown.

And btw, my doc down in Sacramento let it be known what his political sentiments are this morning. Too bad he doesn't live in CA-04.

I do get around a lot. All sorts of settings. You guys must live on a different planet....

Lee

Bob,

Yes, the economy is issue number one and that is great for McClintock

Yes, the nation is still involved in TWO wars and that is why attending anti-war rallies where they hang US soldiers in effigy while wearing what Mr. Stenhouse even admits is a uniform is very BAD for Charlie.

Unless you can come up with something that is good for Charlie or bad for McClintock then I would say this race is pretty much over, since folks are already voting!

John

Wow Lee- thanks for the glimpse into you day.
I was a lovely dinner party in Auburn last weekend. Mixed political crowd and age ranging from 30's to mid 50's and only one (known ultra liberal) was supporting Charlie. Our dinner Table poll came to one non voter, 8 republicans for McClintock, 3 Democrats for Tom and 6 others for Tom (Decline to State and Libertarian)- Wow does that just change you thoughts on the campaign Lee?
Why Does Charlie Lie to me every day?
McClintock has never to my knowledge voted for a tax increase and according to the speech today has been endorsed by all the anti-tax groups.
Charlie- you never talk about issues and you are a LIAR!
(PS- you were in uniform- my whole dinner party agrees- that includes 9 vets)

COHERENCE PLEASE

Bob,

Yes, the economy is issue number one and that is great for McClintock

Yes, the nation is still involved in TWO wars and that is why attending anti-war rallies where they hang US soldiers in effigy while wearing what Mr. Stenhouse even admits is a uniform is very BAD for Charlie.

Unless you can come up with something that is good for Charlie or bad for McClintock then I would say this race is pretty much over, since folks are already voting!

John

October 9, 2008 4:36 PM

You wanna take another crack at that. It is a little loosey goosey around the edges...

Lee

FATSO JUDSON'S SOCK PUPPET JUST SPOKE

Jimmy From Auburn said:
Wow Lee- thanks for the glimpse into you day.
I was a lovely dinner party in Auburn last weekend. Mixed political crowd and age ranging from 30's to mid 50's and only one (known ultra liberal) was supporting Charlie. Our dinner Table poll came to one non voter, 8 republicans for McClintock, 3 Democrats for Tom and 6 others for Tom (Decline to State and Libertarian)- Wow does that just change you thoughts on the campaign Lee?
Why Does Charlie Lie to me every day?
McClintock has never to my knowledge voted for a tax increase and according to the speech today has been endorsed by all the anti-tax groups.
Charlie- you never talk about issues and you are a LIAR!
(PS- you were in uniform- my whole dinner party agrees- that includes 9 vets)

I think I was just lashed by a piece of spaghetti...

Lee

Lee,

Jimmy couldn't lift a piece of spaghetti, he's so light.

Light on ideas.

Light on expressing himself like an adult.

Light on thinking.

Light, period.

Bob

Lee,

I don't think I need to take another crack at that post: Here we have a SECOND poll that shows McClintock getting almost 90% of the votes. Time to stick a fork in the old Charlie campaign!

John

Speaking of Sock Puppets - "Bob" is just as anonymous as Jimmy from Auburn.

And that's the ONLY thing we have in common.

""""Jimmy"""" hasn't posted anything thoughtful or backed by research ONCE. He's a simple partisan hack who has nothing better to say than "liberal liar" which would be stretching his limited vocabulary if he didn't hear the phrase on talk radio every day.

Bob

Bob,

You are SO kind!

You should take a trip through the Gospels, which is good for all of us on a regular basis. As you do, every time you see the word Pharisee, think "Bob" and pay special attention to the lesson Jesus is teaching at that point.

John

BEFORE THE OPENING BELL

No words of wisdom come to mind. The markets are crashing around the globe.

John Stoos speaks of taking a trip through the Gospels. I second the motion. Especially pay attention to what is said about GREED.

To John's credit, he does not live high on the hog. And he encourages members of his flock to live with in their means.

The sadness of what might have been is this. John chose to focus his ministry to the community at large, not on GREED, but on abortion and homosexuality. Sins of the flesh.

I think that John made choices. Sins of the flesh have more legs politically. Railing against GREED was deemed not a political winner.

Let me repeat that. RAILING AGAINST GREED WAS DEEMED NOT A POLITICAL WINNER. That would be stepping on toes of those who would be useful to leveraging the politically juicy sins of the flesh issues. So GREED was not mentioned in the family values political package.

John bought into Rush's Christian Reconstructionism. And Rushdoony gave pseudo-Christian cover to GREED...

“The means to lawful wealth is the covenant law, the law of God. Capitalization is thus a radical and total task. Man must seek to subdue the earth and gain wealth as a means of restitution and restoration, as means of establishing God’s dominion in every realm. Wherever godly men establish their superior productivity and gain wealth, they thereby glorify God. Wealth in itself is good, and a blessing of the Lord.”

R. J. Rushdoony, The Institutes of Biblical Law (Nutley, NJ: Craig Press, 1973) p. 524.

In other words, as Gordon Gekko in WALL STREET said:

"Greed is good. Greed is right. Greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed in all of its forms, greed for life, for money, for love, knowlege has marked the upward surge of mankind. And greed, you mark my words, will not only save Teldar Paper, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JaKkuJVy2YA

Anything less than full support of GREED was cleverly given the catch-all perjorative, "Socialism". REGULATION was anti unfettered GREED.

John, let me repeat, you made choices. You struck a Faustian bargain. You would gain the financial support of Gilder, Scaife, Ahmmanson by railing against REGULATION of financial markets and the esoteric financial derivatives that have plunged all of us into economic Hell.

So, as the OPENING BELL rings...do not ask for whom the bell tolls.

IT TOLLS FOR THEE...

Lee Reed

"Bob"... you missed another difference. Jimmy from Auburn is not getting paid to be here.

And Another - Jimmy from Auburn is not a consultant.

And Another - Baised research is worse than doing research at all.

Just give it up "Bob" and come out of the closet like Brown did last night.

John:

Maybe Lee should read "Productive Christians in the Age of Guilt Manipulators" by David Chilton. Maybe Lee should know that poor people are greedy as well who use the voting booth as a method of robbery. We don't need Jesus, Charlie will take care of all of our needs.

Lee,

I certainly agree with all that you said about greed and taking note of what Jesus said about it in the Gospels [I am preaching on the rich young ruler this Sunday, which is pretty timely!] and what He provided in the Book of Proverbs is a great idea.

However, I think you are confusing what John Calvin or R.J. Rushdooney would teach with the modern mentality of Wall Street. We have not seen real Biblical capitalism, where private property is respected and promises & contracts are enforces, in over a hundred years. Free market capitalism is not "all about greed," in fact it is the only economic system that manages to control greed which is a sin found in all the children of Adam.

John

John

Baised Research

Fatso Judson amazes me. He seems so low brow and yet he knows about that sensational French movie, Baise-moi.

I dunno, that is a little out there for CA-04. Fatso a closet New French Extremity connoisseur...

Triple wow

Lee

Here it is. Complete.

The Tom McClintock plan for the economy.

(source: www.tomcclintock.com)

"Bring fiscal sanity back to the federal government

The fiscal problems that we experience here in California are only magnified in the federal budget. The common sense proposals that I have proposed here in California will have a tremendous impact on reducing the size of the federal government and increasing its efficiency. We need to implement a federal spending limit and to cut out all of the waste and mismanagement of the federal government."

That is it. If you click on the big banner on the home page that says "Tom McClintock on the Financial Crisis" instead of some detailed plans you get a link to...an audio clip from a radio interview over ten days ago. The radio interview doesn't contain a plan, either.

Searching in vain elsewhere on the site I can find nothing else on the issue that is A#1 around the world and most definitely in our little corner of Northern California. No, instead what I find is page after page and video after video of negative attacks on Charlie Brown.

McClintock's website IS McClintock. It's a nutshell of who the man is and what he cares about.

When I go to Charlie's site I find a wealth of mostly very positive information. Plans, detailed statements on issues. You may disagree with some of them but you can't accuse Charlie of not thinking through what he wants to do in this job.

Tom McClintock...he just wants a job. He hasn't thought through what he wants to do at all. It's abundantly clear.

Bob

Well. I'm not the only one to notice Tom has no plan for the current economic crisis. This post is quite balanced, draws from a personal conversation with McClintock and IMHO is worth a complete reading regardless of your political persuasion:

http://realpundits.com/?p=909

Quote
Tom McClintock, a California Conservative against McCain
Friday, October 10th, 2008 | Uncategorized
By Daniel Washburn

McClintock is hoping to win in California’s 4th district (Sacramento county, El Dorado county, and several surrounding counties). As his website points out “California’s 4th Congressional district is widely considered to be California’s most conservative Republican congressional seat.”

He is competing against democrat Charlie Brown, a retired Lt Colonel in the US Air Force.

Brown is a long time district resident. McClintock, on the other hand, seems to drift between the 4th district and the LA area — where he was a state senator (19th district).

Polls show that Brown has held a slight lead throughout the summer. However, the race remains close, and now McClintock has starting vocalizing his conservative credentials by opposing McCain’s new homeowner bailout plan.

McCain announced a new homeowner bailout plan during the Nashville debate on Oct 7th. It could potentially provide $300 billion to protect homeowners who are in danger of losing their houses.

I had the chance to speak with McClintock this evening — as he was fielding questions during a conference call.

He not only opposed McCain’s homeowner bailout proposal, as was made clear by my question, but reiterated his dissatisfaction with the government’s $700 billion bailout.

Since his positions seemed to amount to inaction, I thought it prudent to see whether or not he had any alternative solutions.

To my mind, he does not; at least not any immediate solutions. His approach is one which honors the will of the free market.

To some extent it is true that many home buyers, over the last several years, purchased properties that were out of their price range, and it is also true that many lenders did not require borrowers to prove or document their stated income.

Greed, we might say, prevailed.

What is the solution? Will McClintock’s minimal-action strategy, that he voiced to me, offer a way out for frozen credit markets and a plummeting stock market?

In 1933 FDR said “practices of the unscrupulous money changers stand indicted in the court of public opinion, rejected by the hearts and minds of men…. The money changers have fled from their high seats in the temple of our civilization.” Many banks were closed by the government in March of 1933 and, under the Emergency Banking Act, FDR ordered them to remain closed. He then began to reopen banks under treasury supervision — providing federal loans as needed. In under a year 5,000 banks had passed inspection and were reopened — helping to restore faith in the banking system.

Yet what does McClintock suggest? Is he opposed to restoring faith in the banking system? He says that congress and the two presidential candidates are wrong on the $700 billion bailout (listen to McClintock oppose the bailout). He seems to offer no alternatives (apart from lowering the base rate and suspending short sales), whereas history suggests that substantially tighter regulation, and a capital infusion, is what may be needed.

In this climate, the economy is the top issue of the presidential election. Obama is gaining ground and his economic proposals are propelling him further.

I am impressed that McClintock is sticking to his fiscal-conservative guns — and all the more so as his stubbornness appears to be costing him California’s most conservative district. If I were advising McClintock I’d say: This is no time for inactivity, or small time ideas, Tom. Brown beat you by 5 points in the latest poll. The district looks like it may flip, and oddly, you are doing nothing to help yourself in this regard.
Unquote

Bob

Bob:

So the two major candidates backed the bailout. So what? McCain's support for the bailout has actually hurt him. I adher to people who stood for principle like Ron Paul, Jeff Flake or my old friend from college Cathy McMorris Rodgers instead of the lemmings who were bribed with pork for vote for the bailout. As I said in this blog constantly, FDR's policies aggravated the Depression and the unemployment rates remain in doulbe digits for the entire 1930s.

Sorry about your five-year plan Charlie, but with the TRILLION dollar bailout, there is no more money left in the till for your health care and education programs.

Bob:

Read that first line you quoted from Tom: Can you think of a better plan?

Now I have to admit that Mr. Washburn's musings were very fair and balanced... NOT!

He did remind us of a nice piece of history though: Hoover & Roosevelt [not unlike Clinton & Bush] put the heavy hand of government on everything and look at the result: Washburn is proud of the fact that FDR reopened 5,000 banks, so that much like today the fat cats were taken care of: What happened to mainstreet? We had to endure double digit unemployment until WWII and if you look at the chart on the front page of the Sacramento Bee, you will see one of the BIGGEST declines in the stock market came in 1937 AFTER FDR had worked all the government magic that he could.

Now Charlie on the other hand does have LOTS of details and they all involve MORE government! They are nice talking points from Speaker Pelosi which only goes to show that it is actually Charlie who is part of the problem!

I think the voters of the 4th CD will send someone to Washington that will advocate solutions that will work!

John

PS: Just in case you still have not found them on the web site, those solutions would be to lower taxes and balance the federal budget: That should keep Congress busy for quite some time and actually bring back a strong economy rather than the wall street and federal reserve bubbles we have been enduring.

John and Efrem,

I think you need to slide your revisionist history books back onto the top shelf and leave them there. They aren't doing you any good; they make you look ill informed.

The Depression resulted from a series of events and actions over many months. The obvious starting point was the Wall Street crash of October, 1929. But it took many months to slide to the depths of the depression. The stock market didn't hit bottom until 1932 which was also the year of the most significant contraction in the U.S. economy.

Roosevelt didn't take office until March of 1932. Between October, 1929 and his inauguration Hoover was president. The isolationist tariff Smoot-Hawley act of 1930, an act introduced by a Republican Senator and a Republican Congressman and signed by a Republican president, is widely believed to have poured gasoline on the fire making the economic situation far worse. On top of that the Federal Reserve raised interest rates, and Hoover and a democratic-controlled Congress raised taxes in an ill-conceived attempt to balance the budget when what was needed was an infusion of cash into the economy.

I'm sure you'll dust off another revisionist history in response but simply remember that people recognize your rationalization and revision for what it is: A way to shift blame and to try--yet again--to wiggle out of another Republican-caused debacle.

Bob

Ay!! Bob:

So Smoot-Hawley aggravated the Depression. Right you are!! However, let's not beat around the bush. When the Democrats had a 313 to 117 seat majority after the 1932 elections, they had the ball in their court and could have repealed Smoot-Hawley and get the nation rolling again. Yet with even greater majorities in 1934 and 1936 (334-88 in 1936), the Democrats still couldn't find their way. Revisionist history? No, just fact!!! So tell me how Charlie will give all of these goodies out to everyobdy when there is nothing left in the till?

Efrem,

By 1932 it was far too late. The damage had already been done. It's hard to trade when the world isn't making anything. You really do need to put those revisionist books down and try to get a more rounded perspective on history.

If the facts don't fit, don't force them

Bob

Bob:

Since Charlie gets a lot of his money from the unions, maybe he should read what the United Auto Workers thought about Smoot-Hawley:

"When conservatives rail in the media of the dangers of "returning to Smoot Hawley, which created the Great Depression," all they do is reveal their ignorance of economics and history. The Smoot-Hawley tariff legislation, which increased taxes on some imported goods by a third to two-thirds to protect American industries, was signed into law on June 17, 1930, well into the Great Depression. In the following two years, international trade dropped from 6 percent of GNP to roughly 2 percent of GNP (between 1930 and 1932), but most of that was the result of the depression going worldwide, not Smoot-Hawley. The main result of Smoot-Hawley was that American businesses now had strong financial incentives to do business with other American companies, rather than bring in products made with cheaper foreign labor: Americans started trading with other Americans. "

http://www.uaw.org/atissue/atstory.cfm?atId=78

Try wiggling out of that one, BOB!!!

Bob,

IF you had read my post more carefully you would have seen that I blamed both Hoover and FDR and you simply outlined Hoover's sins.

However, the vast right-wing conspiracy that you and Hillary are concerned about is certainly growing because I took my "revisionist" history from the on the FRONT page of the Sacramento Bee where they compared bear markets.

So here is a little REAL history to chew on:

The bear market of 1929-32 dropped by 83% [the Bee did not list this one]
Hoover gets full credit for that one!

The bear market of 1937-46 dropped 60%
FDR gets full credit for that one!

So the lesson from history is that if you want to turn market corrections like we saw for the first one hundred and fifty years of our history, into major depressions, then you need to have LOTS of government intervention!

John

PS: A drop of 60% would take the market to 5,600. A drop of 83% would mean the market would close at 2,380 so we need to hope and pray that that history does not have to repeat itself.

That last post really was me: Don't know why the name was left off?

John

Aaron,

"I was the MP not you". True. But you received an OTH discharge, not me. And I was in for twenty years, worked in legal offices, led formal investigations and was an XO and a CO of a commissioned Navy unit, not you. It was my job to understand and administer military justice. It was yours to catch alleged perps and make sure they stayed locked up until released.

As I said disobeying a direct lawful order is not something an officer or any military member takes lightly. They do it at their own peril. If the person's intentions are good and the result is good then the military would be foolish to prosecute. There is no precedent at stake here because there are many examples of people in the military disobeying a lawful order with good results and the military condoning their actions. As I said, it's what we pay people to do: Use judgment and make good decisions.

You don't know the actual circumstances any more than I do. This story rings true to me, though. I've been involved with Naval Aviation and understand how the situation Brown describes could easily occur in such a way that his information was superior to his controlling authority's. I have no reason to question Brown when he says that his command told him he had done the right thing. You don't have a leg to stand on (as usual).

Read a book about the USS Indianapolis if you want an example of just how bad a military controlling authority can be at understanding what is going on with units out in the real world.

You can rant and rave all you want but you are digging a deeper hole for your candidate and yourself. What Brown did took courage. It's the kind of courage that resonates with people, and it's the kind of courage McClintock has never had to muster because he's never been in command of anything. Your attack on Brown's decision? It doesn't resonate with anybody who thinks about it and is honest with themself.

Bob

John,

The bear market of 1937-1946? Let me seee...what was going on during that period...hmmm...oh yeah! World War Two.

Do you even stop to think before you post?

Bob

Oops...posted the comment to Aaron on the wrong string by accident. Oh well...it's worth repeating.

Bob

Bob,

Gee Bob I guess you will have to write a letter-to-the-editor because they sure have their facts wrong today!

The point is that what Efrem brought out is absolutely true: FDR and the Democrats had free reign for almost eight years and nothing got any better UNTIL the war broke out.

NEVER in our history had it taken so long to recover from a market adjustment, and there had been some BIG ones in our history.

So, IF you think government is THE solution and you want to send Charlie to Washington to fix things, name the first two things that you would have him do.

John

1) Ensure Tom McClintock has a good-paying consulting job in Australia
2) Never listen to you, Aaron or Efrem

Bob,

That sounds more productive than what I have seen or heard about Charlie's plan. Keep those improvements coming!

John