The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

Archives

Ad Watch

McCain Again Hits Obama on Fannie Ties

By Jonathan Weisman
The Ad: John McCain's campaign, picking up where it left off Thursday, released a new advertisement challenging Sen. Barack Obama's credentials on the financial crisis by linking him to former Fannie Mae chief executive Jim Johnson, who once led Obama's vice presidential search panel.

The ad starts with Obama saying, "It would be unacceptable for executives of these institutions to earn a windfall," then dismisses the statement as hypocrisy because of Obama's ties to Johnson.

"Fannie cooked the books and Johnson made millions," the announcer states. "Then Obama asked him to pick his VP, and raise thousands for his campaign."

Analysis: After a previous ad sought to link Obama to another Fannie CEO, Franklin Raines, McCain appears to have shifted onto more solid ground. The Raines ad had raised some eyebrows. Raines's connection to Obama's campaign was tangential at best: He had told The Washington Post in an interview that campaign aides had called him for advice, a statement he denied Thursday night. Indeed, Raines may have been puffing himself up for the Post's profile, a "where is he now" piece checking in on the once-high-profile Washington figure.

The juxtaposition in the Raines ad of an African American presidential candidate next to an African American business leader raised some racial alarm bells, especially since Obama's connection with another Johnson, who is white, was so much more obvious. And in both cases, the former CEOs appear to have personally been enriched by the accounting irregularities perpetrated at Fannie Mae.

Now, McCain is taking on the Johnson connection. After Johnson was named the head of Obama's vice presidential search committee, that connection was made by the media quickly. Newspapers uncovered sweetheart mortgage deals that Johnson received from another tainted figure, Countrywide chief executive Angelo Mozilla, and went back over the details of the Golden Parachute that Johnson received when he left Fannie. Within days, Obama had pushed him out of the campaign.

But McCain is playing with fire, because his campaign also has deep ties to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Rick Davis, McCain's campaign manager, was president of the Homeownership Alliance, which advocates the expansion of homeownership through low-interest mortgages funded by Fannie and Freddie. Arthur B. Culvahouse Jr., who headed McCain's vice presidential vetting panel, was a lobbyist for Fannie Mae. Mark Buse, a longtime McCain aide, lobbied for Freddie Mac before returning to McCain's Senate staff.

On the Democratic side, besides Raines and Johnson, Maria Echaveste -- a top Clinton White House official whose husband, Christopher Edley Jr., is a close Obama friend and adviser -- has lobbied for Freddie. Former commerce secretary William M. Daley, a top Obama supporter, was on Fannie's board of directors.

Posted at 10:23 AM ET on Sep 19, 2008  | Category:  Ad Watch
Share This: Technorati talk bubble Technorati | Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This
Previous: McCain Offers Few Details on Economic Plan | Next: FEC? SEC? McCain Seeks to Emphasize Accountability for Financial Crisis


Add 44 to Your Site
Be the first to know when there's a new installment of The Trail. This widget is easy to add to your Web site, and it will update every time there's a new entry on The Trail.
Get This Widget >>


Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



So Larry when can I get the $1000?

Obama is the 2nd highest recipient of money from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae campaign contributions behind only Chris Dodd (another Democrat). The reason that Fannie mae and Fredie mac collapsed was because it was paying the Democrats off so they would not regulate it more.

That's not to mention what the article said, which is that Obama hired the previous CEO of Fannie mae as a close advisor. At best, McCain's advisors aren't that close and they didn't earn millions off of "creative accounting" like Obamas man did.

In 2005, McCain and the Republicans tried to regulate them more but the Democrats blocked the vote.

See http://www.mail-archive.com/abc_politics_forum@googlegroups.com/msg20418.html.

It's funny how blind Obama supporters are. Look at the facts, your man was accepting money so that he would not do something (it's called a bribe for those of you that don't know) and you want this man to be president?
I wouldn't trust him to be my neighbor much more the President.I also couldn't be his neighbor becuase I don't know any criminals that can hook me up with a nice home for well below market value like Obama.

My wife also isn't paid 300k a year from her "non profit work" unlike Obama's wife. She sure seems to be earning a healthy profit to me.

Let the discussion begin. Try to actually argue a position with facts instead of name calling. I know its really hard for you but try, At least then we'll discover whose right instead of you can insult the other the most. I don't plan on insulting you and I would prefer it in return but I can't say in the past that any Obamaites have been ok with that rule. They all seem to want to swear and insult as their man and his "ideas" lack substance.

Posted by: I'll take a thousand dollars | September 21, 2008 5:42 AM

If anyone can prove that Obama has more of a Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac connection than John McCain I will pay them $1000. McCain is a flat out liar.. and it's disgraceful shame.

Posted by: Larry J. | September 20, 2008 9:20 PM

Here's the ad the Obama campaign should run. It's called "Thanks, John McCain".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJThPjvscFs&e

Posted by: Mark | September 20, 2008 5:32 PM

Now that Obama has explicitly endorsed 'guilt by association' as a legitimate campaign tactic -- even when the association is demonstrably tenuous -- I'm guessing Sean Hannity's Ayres/Wright Tourette's Disorder> is about to take a turn for the worse.

Posted by: Herb55 | September 20, 2008 12:24 PM

McCain is an idiot!

Posted by: RG | September 20, 2008 11:13 AM

Enough with McCain's and Republicans' efforts to tether Obama to individuals with which he has flimsy relationships at most. Just because the two phone calls someone from Obama's camp made to Franklin Raines a long time ago and the few board meetings Obama had with William Ayers is more contact than McCain ever had with Sarah Palin prior to selecting her for his VP slot does not make them "advisors". It just means Republicans have very low standards as to what constitutes a relationship. Obama is a distant blood relative of Dick Cheney so it's not a stretch that he would at least casually encounter a few unsavory individuals in his political career. He doesn't hire them or socialize with them and certainly isn't one of them himself (remember the Keating Five?) like John McCain. And don't even bring up Reverend Wright anymore. There are tens of millions of Catholics that sit through mass listening to a message of "brotherly love" from a priest who then molests a little boy. No one then accuses these parishoners of being peodophiles themselves and then asked why they didn't leave the Catholic Church because the priest's message of "brotherly love" was clearly overtures toward sexually abusing "little brothers". Cut out all of the lies and false accusations and talk about real issues. If McCain does this he isn't even remotely competitive with Obama. We say we value education but this is a competition for the chief lawmaker in this country between a guy who was the best law student in the country's best law school at the country's oldest institution of higher learning versus a guy who graduated at the bottom of his class from the Naval Academy even after having Admirals as his forebears who trumpets his chief qualification for being President is that he crashed his plane and was captured. Get a grip America.

Posted by: Cap | September 20, 2008 11:04 AM

Democrats for John McCain and Sarah Palin in 2008.

Posted by: Jennifer | September 20, 2008 10:39 AM

Scott, Scott, Scott,

Is it really necessary to post these long cut and pastes on every blog? Can't you just paste a link instead? It really doesn't sway anyone since most people here quite obviously have made up their minds. In fact, I would say it only hurts your cause since most people will just skip the posts for their shear length.

Posted by: Oh brother! | September 20, 2008 9:16 AM

The Atlantic
September 18, 2008
An economist explains why he thinks McCain's economic policies make more sense
by Steven Landsburg

(Steven E. Landsburg (born 1954) is an American professor of economics at the University of Rochester in Rochester, New York. From 1989 to 1995, he taught at Colorado State University.)


Betting on John McCain

My whole life I've been mystified by the concept of the "undecided voter." I've never had any problem choosing my candidates and didn't see how anyone else could either. But this year, I've been genuinely on the fence, partly because I haven't been paying close attention, and partly because there seemed ample reason to dislike all of the options.
But over the past few days, as McCain and Obama have ratcheted up their rhetoric over each others' "disastrous" economic policies, I decided to do a little research. Along the way, I had a few surprises about John McCain's voting record, some but not all of them pleasant. Now I don't think I'm undecided anymore.
Here are some of the things that made my decision easy, and some that made it hard:
1. Free trade and immigration are my top issues, and McCain wins on both.
These are my top issues for several reasons. First, trade is the engine of prosperity not just for the United States but also for the poorest of the world's poor. Nothing matters more than that. Second, the instinct to care about the national origin of your trading partner (or employer, or employee, or landlord, or tenant) is an ugly one, and the instinct to care about the national origin of other people's trading partners—and on that basis to interfere forcibly with other people's voluntary transactions—is even uglier.
Finally, protectionism, like creationism, requires an extraordinary level of willful ignorance. The consensus for free trade among economists is approximately as solid as the consensus for evolution among biologists, and it is a consensus supported by a solid body of both theory and observation. To ignore that consensus betrays a degree of anti-intellectualism that frightens me.
McCain is quite good on this issue, not just in terms of rhetoric (which I've known for a while) but in terms of voting record (which I've just recently researched). Obama, by contrast, promises to be our first explicitly protectionist president since Herbert Hoover. Some intervening presidents (Reagan, Bush I, and to a lesser extent Bush II) have been weak in their commitments to free trade, but none between Hoover and Obama has so explicitly rejected it.
2. McCain is not Bush. This came as a surprise to me. I'd been assuming, in my ill-read, uneducated way, that McCain had been complicit in most of the great travesties of the Bush administration and the execrable Republican Senate. I've learned that's largely untrue. He voted (to my great surprise!) against the prescription drug entitlement, against the Farm Security Bill, against milk subsidies, against Amtrak subsidies, and against highway subsidies.
Obama, by contrast, is in many ways a continuation of Bush. Like Bush (only far more so ), Obama is fine with tariffs and subsidies. Like Bush, he wants to send jackbooted thugs into every meatpacking plant in America to rid the American workplace of anyone who happens to have been born on the wrong side of an imaginary line. Like Bush, he wants a more progressive tax code. (It is one of the great myths of 21st century that the Bush tax cuts made the tax code less progressive; the opposite is true. If you are in the bottom 38% of taxpayers, you now pay zero income tax—and therefore have an incentive to support any spending bill that comes down the pike.) Like Bush, he wants more regulation, not less.

3. But there's a lot about economics that McCain just doesn't get. This shows up most significantly in his energy policies. Every economist knows that the best way to discourage carbon emissions (or anything else for that matter) is to tax them. But McCain rejects a carbon tax in favor of one slightly inferior policy (cap and trade) and one grossly inferior policy (direct regulation, such as the CAFE standards for fuel efficiency).
In a world of perfect capital markets and perfect information, a cap-and-trade system (provided the government auctions off the permits rather than giving them away) is exactly equivalent to a carbon tax – same effect on everything down to and including the prices of consumer goods. In the real world we live in, it's inferior for two reasons: First, small firms might find it difficult=2 0to raise the necessary capital to buy a permit; this gives an inappropriate advantage to big firms over small ones. Second, I believe it will be harder (for technical reasons I won't go into here) to calculate the efficient number of cap-and-trade permits than to calculate the efficient per-ton carbon tax. Aside from that, the two policies are equivalent in every way. McCain presumably doesn't get this, or he wouldn't have such a strong preference for cap-and-trade.
Worse, he endorses the CAFE standards, which are just a terrible way to control carbon emissions. While a carbon tax gets incentives right at every decision point, fuel efficiency standards give people no incentive, for example, to bike to work instead of drive (in fact, they flip the incentive in the wrong direction). Worse yet, they concentrate brainpower on improving fuel efficiency when there might be far more effective ways to control carbon emissions; with a tax, all innovations are rewarded.
In his support of CAFE standards over carbon taxes, McCain betrays a serious failure to understand how incentives work. The same problem shows up when he thinks you can simply mandate campaign finance limits, as if people who are competing for control of a $15 trillion economy won't be creative enough to find some way to spend hundreds of millions in the effort, no matter how you write your laws.
4. McCain gets health care right. The reason poor Americans get too little health care is that rich Am ericans get too much. The reason rich Americans get too much is that they're overinsured, and therefore run to the doctor for minor problems. The reason they're overinsured is that employer-provided health benefits aren't taxed, so employers overprovide them.
It has been clear for decades that the single most effective way to control health care costs is to eliminate the tax break for employer-provided health care. According to one careful study by my colleague Charles Phelps (admittedly several years old, but I'm not sure anything relevant has changed), this single reform could reduce health care costs by 40% with essentially no effect on health care outcomes.
Essential as this reform may be, I'd always assumed it was a political non-starter. I was therefore astonished to learn that it's the essence of McCain's health care reform. (At the same time, he would give each individual $2500, and each family $5000, to use for health care.)
I am astonished that I hadn't heard about this, and particularly astonished that Barack Obama hasn't thrust it in my face with a negative spin. Possibly he has and I just wasn't paying attention. In any case, this is just what the doctor ordered, and I am delighted that McCain has put it on the table.
Obama, by contrast, wants poor people to get more medical care without addressing the problem of overuse by rich people. Where is that extra medical care going to come from? If the answer is "nowhere," then a primary effect of the Obama plan must be to raise prices, making doctors and hospitals the big beneficiaries.
Of course, there are other things that matter. Foreign and defense policy might matter more than anything, and if I were sure that one or the other candidate were far wiser about these issues, that might be enough to win my vote. But I have no expertise on these matters and no particular reason to trust my own judgment.
I'm sure I'm right about trade and pretty sure I'm right about taxes and health care, but that's because I've thought long and hard about these issues for decades. It seems to me that we ought to be humble about the things we haven't thought hard about, and for me that includes foreign policy. The best I can do is bet that whoever's getting most of the other stuff right is getting this right too.
The bottom line is that I support John McCain. With trepidation.

Posted by: Scott | September 20, 2008 8:36 AM

Actually, this was not free market failing but rather government failing. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were government chartered corporations. Because they were government chartered, they did not use the same rules as the rest of the banks and gave out these crazy mortgages because implicitly everyone knew that the government could not let them fail. But given the twisted way Fannie and Freddie worked, they actually lobbied the US government (remember, these are government charter corporations) to let them do what they wanted. The rules that were put into place were approved by (GASP) Bill Clinton and advocated by Rubin and passed by a Republican Congress. There is enough blame to go around. That is why Obama is not tearing into McCain. The funny thing is that McCain and Greenspan both warned about Fannie and Freddie in 2005 but nobody was listening. Since what they advocated would have tightened the credit markets for "average" homeowners, the Democrats did not want to look as if they were hurting the "little guy" by requiring them to (gasp) provide proof that they could actually pay for their mortgage.

Of course the biggest problem was that the mortgages were bundled into securities so there is no direct connection between a particular default and a particular security. Therefore, the securities are worthless at this time. Again this bundling practice was something that was approved by the congress and signed by Clinton.

Posted by: SMAN | September 20, 2008 3:07 AM

Dear John McCain...


Given the events of the last week, are you still in favor of privatizing Social Security?

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-mccainsocial14-2008jul14,0,1786903.story


It is, after all, part of the 2008 Republican Platform. And back in 2005, you travelled the country with President Bush in order to try to sell Bush's privatization plan.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A56913-2005Mar22.html


But at the moment, your answers seem to be a bit... muddled?


"Wall Street turmoil left John McCain scrambling to explain why the fundamentals of the U.S. economy remained strong. It also left him defending his support for privately investing Social Security money in the same markets that had tanked earlier in the week. [...]"

"[McCain] aides tried to soothe voters concerned about the bankruptcies, takeovers and bailouts on Wall Street by declaring McCain favored only the option of such accounts, just for younger workers, and most likely in a conservative investment vehicle such as bonds".

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gwHGMYappR5eiPj4JoZ8L-7YUacAD939UIJ00


Mmm-hmm. Just for the "young folks" -- and "trust us", we'd only do it in safe investments. You know, with big, reputable companies that wouldn't take insanely foolish risks in order to squeeze out an extra half-point of returns.


So let's talk about this, McCain: do you still think we should be putting people's retirement-savings-of-last-resort into Wall Street, or don't you? It sounds like some folks just think it's just a question of marketing...


Private accounts for Social Security are "always an easier sell when the markets are going up instead of going down," said David Wyss, chief economist at Standard & Poor's. "I don't think this is a good week to sell that one politically, but you're looking at the long term here. You're investing your retirement funds for 20 or 30 years down the road."


I'm dying to hear the answer (mavericky staight-talk?) to this one. Or answers, as the case may be.

Posted by: DrainYou | September 19, 2008 6:08 PM

After years of Republican led deregulation (McCain, Phil Gramm), of promotion of greed and assertion of the superiority of the market, and in particular of financial makrets to decide how to run the economy, it appears - nay, make that: it is now blatantly, in your face, obvious - that none of this worked. Worse, the people that have mocked government throughout (Bush, Cheney, McCain) as wasteful, inefficient and incompetent are now counting on the very same government to bail them out from the hole they have dug.


They made out like bandits during the "boom" years of the boom-AND-bust cycle they brought about with their policy suggestions, looting the middle classes in the process and are now trying - may, make that "succeeding" - to not bear the consequences of the same policies.


They have no consistency, no shame and no scruples.


What do we need to do to ensure that we NEVER EVER LISTEN TO THESE PEOPLE AGAIN?


"They" being the highly-paid ideologues funded by a few anti-tax billionaires (Grover Norquist etc) the politicians in their hock (Bush, McCain), the multi-millionaire pundit class that enjoys their company (all of the clowns at Fox "News", Rush Limpbaugh, Michelle Malkin etc etc etc) all the idiots that think they are also part of the "rich" that benefit from these policies, or will one day be, and all the heartless fools who think that the poor deserve their fate and that it's a good thing for them to let them remain that way in their community - or who don't think there is such thing as a community).


But there is a simple solution: punitive marginal tax rates on income. It worked after WW2, it will work now too.


Final thought:
If you vote for McCain, you're a moron...
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mHsuL6FfY4
.

Posted by: As of today, I am a former Republican | September 19, 2008 4:57 PM

The mud slingers are back. Personal attacks is the only policy John McFlip has.Every time Obama makes gains in the polls John McFlip attacks him personally. Lies more lies and some more lies. John McFlip is a desperate man.He is even playing the race card now He knows he has lost this election. So Long John McFlip and Sarah McFlop.

Posted by: unclesam | September 19, 2008 4:24 PM

FEDERAL HOUSING ENTERPRISE REGULATORY REFORM ACT OF 2005

GovTrak- Senate Record

Sen. John McCain [R-AZ]: Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae's regulator reported that the company's quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were "illusions deliberately and systematically created" by the company's senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight's report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae's former chief executive officer, OFHEO's report shows that over half of Mr. Raines' compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac.

The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator's examination of the company's accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.

For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac--known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs--and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO's report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO's report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.

Quick Info
S. 190 [109th]: Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005
Last Action: Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Status: DeadI join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.

I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.


Posted by: Scott | September 19, 2008 4:00 PM

Hi,

I wanted to draw your attention to this important petition that I recently signed:

"Impeach Senator Barack Obama"
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/obamaimpeachment?e ...

I really think this is an important cause, and I'd like to encourage you to add your signature, too. It's free and takes less than a minute of your time.

Thanks!............

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/obamaimpeachment?e

Posted by: WillNotBeFooledByObamaNATION | September 19, 2008 3:52 PM

Politicalbuzz.com-

"Up in the air tonight is the exact role of scandalized former Fannie Mae CEO Franklin Raines in the Obama campaign. Unearthing this long dormant potential thorn for the Dem nominee is a hard-hitting new McCain TV ad that makes the case that Raines is mortgage and housing advisor to Obama.

The source they use for this accusation is a July Washington Post profile of Raines where he said that the Obama campaign had actually called him seeking policy advice on mortgage and housing issues.

In the four years since he stepped down as Fannie Mae’s chief executive under the shadow of a $6.3 billion accounting scandal, Franklin D. Raines has been quietly constructing a new life for himself. He has shaved eight points off his golf handicap, taken a corner office in Steve Case’s D.C. conglomeration of finance, entertainment and health-care companies and more recently, taken calls from Barack Obama’s presidential campaign seeking his advice on mortgage and housing policy matters."
*************
WASHINGTON POST REALLY?

Posted by: Scott | September 19, 2008 3:47 PM

In a twisted sort of way I almost want McCain to win this election because four more years worth of failed Bush/McCain policies would for all intents and purposes be the end of the Republican party as we know it today. They would become the 4th party gadflies that they deserve to be.


The only question is, would this country survive it?


All of you people out there who live in economic downtrodden states like Ohio, Pa and Michigan etc, if you're stupid enough to vote for four more years of disasterous Bush/McCain policies then you will deserve every bit of economic hardship that a "President McCain" would give you.
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxT0s_I5WtA
.

Posted by: Stacey Hill | September 19, 2008 2:49 PM

Can we all just get alone?

Posted by: Rodney | September 19, 2008 2:46 PM

This is how the Ruplicans Play and this is why I like this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sspOJXTFv-Y

Posted by: Mark from Tenn | September 19, 2008 2:44 PM

OBAMA = BETRAYAL
Obama supporters are foolish to think that he will never betray them.
Obama was a close friend of Pastor Wright for TWENTY YEARS.
Obama threw Wright under the bus for personal ambition.
McCain would not betray his country even after 5 years of torture.
You can put lipstick on a traitor, but he's still a traitor.

Posted by: Howard | September 19, 2008 2:40 PM

This is why I like John McCain

Posted by: Mark from Tenn | September 19, 2008 2:36 PM

If recent history has taught us anything it's that when Republicans reside in the White House a select few people prosper and thrive:
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3ecNXWEJ6A
.


While everyone else is fortunate if at the end of the day they still have a roof over their head and food on the table:
.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080918/ap_on_re_us/tent_cities
.

Posted by: Caribou Barbie | September 19, 2008 2:26 PM

Senator Obama will offer the following explanation regarding his relationship with Franklin Raines and Joe Johnson.

This is someone I just happen to know from Washington. It is not the (fill in the blank) I know.

This was the similar to what he said regarding Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko, Father Michael Pfleger and the Reverend Jeremiah Wright he became involved in controversy regarding them.

Posted by: Joe Jankovic | September 19, 2008 2:18 PM

Senator John McCain is standing by comments he made to a Spanish-language radio station in which he refused to rule in or out a meeting with Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero of Spain. His ambiguous statement earlier this week raised questions about whether Mr. McCain intended to direct his remarks at Mr. Zapatero.

In an interview with Radio Caracol Miami on Tuesday, Mr. McCain spoke only in generalities when asked whether, as president, he would sit down at the White House with Mr. Zapatero, who has clashed with the Bush administration over Iraq.

“I’m willing to meet with any leader,” Mr. McCain said, “who is dedicated to the same principles and philosophy that we are for human rights, democracy and freedom, and I will stand up to those that do not.”

Mr. McCain’s comments caused a stir among the press in Spain and did not escape the attention of Mr. Zapatero, who said that Mr. McCain showed “the necessary prudence” with his remarks.

Adding to the controversy, Mr. McCain appeared to conflate Mr. Zapatero with the leaders of Latin American countries during the interview. “I have a clear record of working with leaders in the hemisphere that are friends with us and standing up to those who are not,” Mr. McCain said. “And that’s judged on the basis of the importance of our relationship with Latin America and the entire region.”

When the interviewer specified that she was asking about Mr. Zapatero Mr. McCain ceded no ground.

On Thursday, a McCain adviser, Randy Scheunemann, brushed off questions about whether Mr. McCain meant to strike a more charitable tone toward Mr. Zapatero, saying, “There is no doubt Senator McCain knew exactly to whom the question referred.”

Thanks Scheunemann, you are inching McCaint and peeeuuu Palin closer to the edge of the cliff.....

Posted by: AlexP1 | September 19, 2008 2:13 PM

McCain knows all about bailing out rich bankers and screwing over middle class and poor people, he's been doing it for years.


*McCain - Founding Member of the Keating Five:

McCain was one of the "Keating Five," congressmen investigated on ethics charges for strenuously helping convicted racketeer Charles Keating after he gave them large campaign contributions and vacation trips.
Charles Keating was convicted of racketeering and fraud in both state and federal court after his Lincoln Savings & Loan collapsed, costing the taxpayers $3.4 billion. His convictions were overturned on technicalities; for example, the federal conviction was overturned because jurors had heard about his state conviction, and his state charges because Judge Lance Ito (yes, that judge) screwed up jury instructions. Neither court cleared him, and he faces new trials in both courts.)

Though he was not convicted of anything, McCain intervened on behalf of Charles Keating after Keating gave McCain at least $112,00 in contributions. In the mid-1980s, McCain made at least 9 trips on Keating's airplanes, and 3 of those were to Keating's luxurious retreat in the Bahamas. McCain's wife and father-in-law also were the largest investors (at $350,000) in a Keating shopping center; the Phoenix New Times called it a "sweetheart deal."


*Mafia Ties:

In 1995, McCain sent birthday regards, and regrets for not attending, to Joseph "Joe Bananas" Bonano, the head of the New York Bonano crime family, who had retired to Arizona. Another politician to send regrets was Governor Fife Symington, who has since been kicked out of office and convicted of 7 felonies relating to fraud and extortion.


Here's some straight-talk, my friends:
.
http://www.realchange.org/mccain.htm
.

Posted by: JennyinOhio | September 19, 2008 2:10 PM

From the WSJ

"Mr. McCain clearly wants to distance himself from the Bush Administration. But this assault on Mr. Cox is both false and deeply unfair. It's also un-Presidential."

"In a crisis, voters want steady, calm leadership, not easy, misleading answers that will do nothing to help. Mr. McCain is sounding like a candidate searching for a political foil rather than a genuine solution. He'll never beat Mr. Obama by running as an angry populist like Al Gore, circa 2000."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178318884054675.html?mod=todays_us_opinion

Posted by: nowanna1 | September 19, 2008 2:03 PM

McCain in April declared that there had been "great progress economically" during the Bush years. On more than one occasion, he diagnosed Americans' concerns over the dismal U.S. economy as "psychological." (Phil Gramm, McCain's close friend and adviser supposedly excommunicated over his "whiners" remarks, was back with the campaign last week.) McCain, a man who owns eight homes nationwide, in March lectured Americans facing foreclosure that they ought to be "doing what is necessary -- working a second job, skipping a vacation, and managing their budgets -- to make their payments on time." And when all else fails, McCain told the people of the economically devastated regions in Martin County, Kentucky and Youngstown, Ohio, there's always eBay.


In his defense, McCain's shocking tone-deafness may just be a matter of perspective. When you're as well off as he is, anything below a $5 million income (a figure exceeding that earned on average by the top 0.1% of Americans) seems middle class.


*The $100 Million Man*
Courtesy of his wife Cindy's beer distribution fortune (one her late father apparently chose not to share with her half-sister Kathleen), the McCains are worth well over $100 million. (In the two-page tax summary she eventually released to the public, Cindy McCain reported another $6 million in 2006.) As Salon reported back in 2000, the second Mrs. McCain's millions were essential in launching her husband's political career. Unsurprisingly, the Weekly Standard's Matthew Continetti, who four years ago called Theresa Heinz-Kerry a "sugar mommy," has been silent on the topic of Cindy McCain.


*The Joys of (Eight) Home Ownership*
While fellow adulterer John Edwards was pilloried for his mansion, John McCain's eight homes around the country have received little notice or criticism. His properties include a 10 acre lake-side Sedona estate, euphemistically called a "cabin" by the McCain campaign, and a home featured in Architectural Digest. The one featuring "remote control window coverings" was recently put up for sale. Still, their formidable resources did not prevent the McCains from failing to pay taxes on a tony La Jolla, California condo used by Cindy's aged aunt.


*The Anheuser-Busch Windfall*
As it turns out, the beauty of globalization is in the eye of the beholder. While John McCain apparently played a critical role in facilitating DHL's takeover of Airborne (and with it, the looming loss of 8,000 jobs in Wilmington, Ohio), Cindy McCain is set to earn a staggering multi-million dollar pay-day from the acquisition of Anheuser-Busch by the Belgian beverage giant, In Bev. As the Wall Street Journal reported in July, Mrs. McCain runs the third largest Anheuser-Busch distributorship in the nation, and owns between $2.5 and $5 million in the company's stock. Amazingly, while Missouri's politicians of both parties lined up to try to block the sale, John McCain held a fundraiser in the Show Me State even as the In Bev deal was being finalized.


*McCain's $370,000 Personal Tax Break*
Earlier this year, the Center for American Progress analyzed John McCain's tax proposals. The conclusion? McCain's plan is radically more regressive than even that of President Bush, delivering 58% of its benefits to the wealthiest 1% of American taxpayers. McCain's born-again support for the Bush tax cuts has one additional bonus for Mr. Straight Talk: the McCains would save an estimated $373,000 a year.


*Paying Off $225,000 Credit Card Debt - Priceless*
That massive windfall from his own tax plan will come in handy for John McCain. As was reported in June, the McCains were carrying over $225,000 in credit card debt. The American Express card - don't leave your homes without it.


*Charity Begins at Home*
As Harpers documented earlier this year, the McCains are true believers in the old saying that charity begins at home:
.
Between 2001 and 2006, McCain contributed roughly $950,000 to [their] foundation. That accounted for all of its listed income other than for $100 that came from an anonymous donor. During that same period, the McCain foundation made contributions of roughly $1.6 million. More than $500,000 went to his kids' private schools, most of which was donated when his children were attending those institutions. So McCain apparently received major tax deductions for supporting elite schools attended by his children.
.
Ironically, the McCain campaign last week blasted Barack Obama for having attended a private school in Hawaii on scholarship. That attack came just weeks after John McCain held an event at his old prep school, Episcopal High, an institution where fees now top $38,000 a year.


*Private Jet Setters*
As the New York Times detailed back in April, John McCain enjoyed the use of his wife's private jet for his campaign, courtesy of election law loopholes he helped craft. Despite the controversy, McCain continued to use Cindy's corporate jet. For her part, Cindy McCain says that even with skyrocketing fuel costs, "in Arizona the only way to get around the state is by small private plane."


*Help on the Homefront*
In these tough economic times, the McCains are able to stretch their household budget. As the AP reported in April, "McCain reported paying $136,572 in wages to household employees in 2007. Aides say the McCains pay for a caretaker for a cabin in Sedona, Ariz., child care for their teenage daughter, and a personal assistant for Cindy McCain."


*Well-Heeled in $520 Shoes*
If clothes make the man, then John McCain has it made. As Huffington Post noted in July, "He has worn a pair of $520 black leather Ferragamo shoes on every recent campaign stop - from a news conference with the Dalai Lama to a supermarket visit in Bethlehem, PA." It is altogether fitting that McCain wore the golden loafers during a golf outing with President George H.W. Bush in which he rode around in cart displaying the sign, "Property of Bush #41. Hands Off."


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N38Ug_ugzXs
.

Posted by: McCain = Bush's third term | September 19, 2008 1:52 PM

Here's a little tidbit from 2003, from Obama's great economic adviser:

http://washington.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/2003/06/02/daily37.html

Posted by: info | September 19, 2008 1:52 PM

McCain should be more concerned with his own links to Phil Gramm, the king of deregulation.

Posted by: Sara B. | September 19, 2008 1:49 PM

McCain has been paid a year's salary since he last showed up to work!
.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2008/05/mccain_leads_in_missed_votes.html


$51,345.08 - Senate salary John McCain has 'earned' since he last showed up in the Senate to perform his job on April 9, 2008.


$48,201.00 - The median household income in the US in 2006.
.
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/histinc/h06ar.html


That's right Joe and Jane Sixpack, McCain has now recieved more money for not showing up for his job than you and your family get in a year for showing up for yours.

Posted by: McCain/Palin = LIARS! | September 19, 2008 1:47 PM

This morning MSNBC carried a McCain speech live. McCain said, "Yesterday, I urged the head of the SEC to resign." FALSE.

He also said, "If a family of four makes $35,000 a year, they will receive a $5,000 credit toward purchasing health insurance." Isn't that the poverty level? The average family would have to spend $12,000 a year for health insurance; how is a family at the poverty level supposed to come up with the money to afford this "discounted" insurance?

McCain also blamed the "obstructionist democrat congress" for blocking all the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac legislation he tried to pass five years ago. Umm, excuse me, but weren't the Republicans the ones in control five years ago?

Is it just IMPOSSIBLE for him to be truthful any longer?

Posted by: Laserbeam | September 19, 2008 1:39 PM

"The total listed for Obama is $126,349 — a tiny fraction of the approximately $390 million his campaign has raised, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The list shows McCain has received a total of $21,550 from Fannie and Freddie employees. The list includes donations of at least $200 from those who receive paychecks from Fannie and Freddie. It also includes donations from political action committees — pooled contributions from employees. Obama decided early in his presidential run not to accept PAC contributions, but the Center for Responsive Politics' list includes all contributions for members of Congress dating back to 1989 — including Obama and McCain's Senate campaigns.

The New York Times has published a separate list looking at contributions from "directors, officers, and lobbyists for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac" for the 2008 campaign cycle. That list — using figures from the Federal Election Commission — shows McCain receiving $169,000, while Obama received only $16,000."

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/19/fact-check-did-obama-profit-from-fannie-and-freddie/#more-19364

Posted by: nowanna1 | September 19, 2008 1:22 PM

Sarah Palin responded to comments Barack Obama made on Wednesday when he told his supporters to try and persuade their friends to vote for him, “I want you to argue with them and get in their face” pressing that his backers “are the ones that can make my case.”

http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/09/18/palin-hits-obama-not-the-politics-of-change/

Posted by: Gus | September 19, 2008 1:18 PM

Let me expand a bit on bad mortgages and Wall Street. A broker called me several years ago after the 2000 stock market "crash" offering a new type of security that paid a fairly good interest rate. These securities were based on mortgage loans and were secured by primary residences. Also these were backed by the good faith of the company (a large bank that I will leave unnamed). The sales pitch was easy for the broker-people wouldn't default their primary residence and the bank would never go out of business. I agreed to a small position. That night I lost sleep. How stupid, to think that I could have put that money in an FDIC insured account and not had to worry because the interest rate was only a point better than what I could have gotten at the time. Since the investment was stock I would be the first one to lose money even before bondholders. Since the position was small I kept it until early 2007 when I liquidated it because it made no sense to have such a small positon and have to pay an annual account fee. Fast forward to 9/2008. I didn't get hurt by the poison securities like so many other retirees but I have taken considerable loss in other investment vehicles. Believe it or not my stock portfolio has faired OK but I am now concerned about bonds (that are supposed to be more secure) due to the overtaking of Fannie and Freddie (big bond issuers) and annuities (although I believe these are secured up to $300K per account). I am well diversified and will be ok but I fell very sorry for those retirees that put all or most of their portfolios into these mortgage backed securities especially the ones offered by Lehman. Their interest payments and their nest-eggs are gone. So you young taxpayers out there be aware. Your retired parents will be showing up at your door when their funds run out which will make the additional taxes you pay for this look small.

Posted by: d | September 19, 2008 1:17 PM

mcsame camp they are trying to take the attention off how any many super lobbyest that he has working for him...VOTE OBAMA'08 VOTEOBAMA'08...

Posted by: "praying obama mama" | September 19, 2008 1:10 PM

don't drink the kool-aid people don't be trick..... ain't nobody mad but the devil...

Posted by: renee | September 19, 2008 1:05 PM

Yet another lie from McCain. Raines (may have) met Obama more than two years ago at the Senator's D.C. office.

However, this was prior to Obama running for the presidency.

ONCE AGAIN, MCCAIN LIES.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 19, 2008 12:48 PM

Deregulation and high-risk lending practices caused the Savings and Loan collapse in the 1980s. Taxpayers footed the bill while S&L directors, including George Bush’s brother Neil, walked away with millions. The current financial crisis resulted from similar conditions promoted by the Bush administration and Congressional Republicans, including John McCain. Time for a change?

Posted by: Barbara Campbell | September 19, 2008 12:46 PM

OBAMA'S GIVING A SPEECH RIGHT NOW ON WOMEN'S PAY!!

Barack Obamas also a hypocrite when it comes to bashing McCain on "gender pay equity". The lip service he pays to women's equity issues apparently gives him enough authority and credibility in the liberal feminist world to bash others!

How Team Obama Pays Women,
Pay equity for thee, but not for me.
By Deroy Murdock

"Now is the time to keep the promise of equal pay for an equal day’s work,” Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama said August 28 in his convention acceptance speech. He told the crowd in Denver: “I want my daughters to have exactly the same opportunities as your sons.”

"Obama’s campaign website is even more specific. Under the heading “Fighting for Pay Equity,” the women’s issues page laments that, “Despite decades of progress, women still make only 77 cents for every dollar a man makes. A recent study estimates it will take another 47 years for women to close the wage gap with men at Fortune 500 corporate offices. Barack Obama believes the government needs to take steps to better enforce the Equal Pay Act…”

"Obama’s commitment to federally mandated pay equity stretches from the Rockies to Wall Street and beyond. And yet it seems to have eluded his United States Senate office. Compensation figures for his legislative staff reveal that Obama pays women just 83 cents for every dollar his men make...."

more at: http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NmEzMTZmNTk5MDI0NTZmNjUwMjllN2ZlZTc0MWFmYzY=


McCain, Clinton Pay Women Better than Obama
By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer

"The average pay for women who worked on the Senate staff of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama of Illinois was at least $6,000 below the average pay for men working on Obama's staff. This held true whether the average pay was calculated for all of Obama's staff, only for his non-intern staff, or only for his staff making more than $23,000 on an annual basis. Obama employed slightly more males than females."

more at: http://www.cnsnews.com/Public/Content/article.aspx?RsrcID=31833


AND WE ALREADY KNOW OBAMA'S TRACK RECORD ON EXECUTIVE WOMEN IN TOP OFFICE AFTER HOW HE TREATED HILLARY CLINTON

lip service lip service lip service lip service lip service lip service lip service lip service lip service lip service lip service lip service lip service lip service lip service lip service

lipstick lipstick lipstick lipstick lipstick lipstick lipstick lipstick lipstick lipstick lipstick lipstick lipstick lipstick lipstick lipstick lipstick lipstick lipstick lipstick lipstick lipstick lipstick lipstick

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 19, 2008 12:44 PM

Why don't you do a piece on McCain's campaign leadership being staffed with lobbyists with connections to all manner of domestic and foreign companies and countries who have benefitted from their relationships with McCain. Seriously, is this help John McCain day at the Post?

Posted by: cdgainesville | September 19, 2008 12:38 PM

Read this article titled, "Conservative for Obama." It is very explanatory, thoughtful, and intelligently written. I find a balanced understanding of this person looking at the entire picture, and making decisions accordingly. This is an interesting view from yet another perspective! Bravo!!

http://www.dmagazine.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?nm=Core+Pages&type=gen&mod=Core+Pages&tier=3&gid=B33A5C6E2CF04C9596A3EF81822D9F8E

Posted by: Obama2008 | September 19, 2008 12:37 PM

Neither Johnson nor Raines are in Obama's circle of advisers. The McCain ad is a lie (again).

McCain is desperately trying to get the MSM to focus on something other than his inept, tone-deaf handling of this week's economic crisis. McCain came off as angry, befuddled, and clueless in his speech today in Wisconsin.

Contrast this with the Obama who spoke today, backed by his reliable and stalwart economic advisers. Obama was calm, confident, authoritative -- in a word presidential.

McCain is an old lying incompetent.

Posted by: dee | September 19, 2008 12:37 PM

>> hdimig wrote: "I had to describe Barack Obama in one word, I might suggest "Thoughtful, or Visionary"" "Try "Hypocrite"! That fits."

Barack Obamas also a hypocrite when it comes to bashing McCain on "gender pay equity".

How Team Obama Pays Women,
Pay equity for thee, but not for me.
By Deroy Murdock
September 12, 2008

"Now is the time to keep the promise of equal pay for an equal day’s work,” Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama said August 28 in his convention acceptance speech. He told the crowd in Denver: “I want my daughters to have exactly the same opportunities as your sons.”

"Obama’s campaign website is even more specific. Under the heading “Fighting for Pay Equity,” the women’s issues page laments that, “Despite decades of progress, women still make only 77 cents for every dollar a man makes. A recent study estimates it will take another 47 years for women to close the wage gap with men at Fortune 500 corporate offices. Barack Obama believes the government needs to take steps to better enforce the Equal Pay Act…”

"Obama’s commitment to federally mandated pay equity stretches from the Rockies to Wall Street and beyond. And yet it seems to have eluded his United States Senate office. Compensation figures for his legislative staff reveal that Obama pays women just 83 cents for every dollar his men make...."

more at: http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NmEzMTZmNTk5MDI0NTZmNjUwMjllN2ZlZTc0MWFmYzY=


McCain, Clinton Pay Women Better than Obama
By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer
Wednesday, April 30, 2008

"The average pay for women who worked on the Senate staff of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama of Illinois was at least $6,000 below the average pay for men working on Obama's staff. This held true whether the average pay was calculated for all of Obama's staff, only for his non-intern staff, or only for his staff making more than $23,000 on an annual basis. Obama employed slightly more males than females."

more at: http://www.cnsnews.com/Public/Content/article.aspx?RsrcID=31833

AND WE ALREADY KNOW OBAMA'S TRACK RECORD ON EXECUTIVE WOMEN IN TOP OFFICE AFTER HOW HE TREATED HILLARY CLINTON

Posted by: Donny | September 19, 2008 12:34 PM

How surprising. As Obaby tries to blame McCain for the current crises, he forgets to tell Americans he is in bed with Fannie/Freddy.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 19, 2008 12:30 PM

>> MAC, STL wrote: "Reply to Donny at 11;45 am. Okay, I get it - Obama is to take care of his Kenya brother - because he lives decently in ONE home. Given your altruistic heart, ask Cindy to take care of her American born sisters - then we will be even. All jokes aside, we all need to take a deep breath and focus on all OUR crisis - let's agree to end the name calling - " my daddy can beat up your daddy mentality"!!!!"

Actually, Cindy doesn't own those houses, she controls them through family trusts, etc. And they're not all sitting empty. They have family permanently residing in some of them.

Posted by: Donny | September 19, 2008 12:25 PM

"I had to describe Barack Obama in one word, I might suggest "Thoughtful, or Visionary""

Try "Hypocrite"! That fits.

Posted by: hdimig | September 19, 2008 12:22 PM

Reply to Donny at 11;45 am. Okay, I get it - Obama is to take care of his Kenya brother - because he lives decently in ONE home. Given your altruistic heart, ask Cindy to take care of her American born sisters - then we will be even. All jokes aside, we all need to take a deep breath and focus on all OUR crisis - let's agree to end the name calling - " my daddy can beat up your daddy mentality"!!!!

Posted by: MAC, STL | September 19, 2008 12:21 PM

LoL... TGIF!

Posted by: The Real Donny | September 19, 2008 12:15 PM

Later...movin' on!

Posted by: The Real Donny | September 19, 2008 12:11 PM

OK, REALLY REALLY GOING NOW... any minute now...

Posted by: The Real Donny | September 19, 2008 12:19 PM

Hey, Johnie, why don't you mention how Obama's taken more money from the Fannie/Freddie than any other senator bar one (another Democrat)?

You're not too deep in the tank, are you?

Posted by: info | September 19, 2008 12:16 PM

My work is done here. One last item, McCain's Veep selection committee was led by some of those 24 Fannie/Freddie alums/lobbyists. So, yes - Palin was hand-picked by Fannie and Freddie LOBBYISTS.

Want more of the SAME? - Vote for McCain!

Republicans for Obama!

LoL...

TGIF!

Posted by: The Real Donny | September 19, 2008 12:15 PM

Obama lies and markets die.

Posted by: info | September 19, 2008 12:13 PM

Well, our Limbaugh-robot friends are at it again. The desperately-dishonest-anti-Obama post at 12:05pm is a completely different "Donny" as you may have guessed.

If I was McCain, I'd ask for my money back on that ad!

Later...movin' on!

Posted by: The Real Donny | September 19, 2008 12:11 PM

This is what happens when you give blacks the right to vote!

Go McCain/Palin 08

Posted by: Go USA | September 19, 2008 12:10 PM

FINANCIAL TERRORISM A ROOT CAUSE
OF WALL STREET MONEY MELTDOWN?

Once again, Congress is being asked to rush through emergency legislation which will grant effective control of the economy to the government.

Officials continue to blame lax lending policies on the part of the mortgage industry for spawning this crisis. But is that entirely true?

And is there a hidden agenda at work?

Consider this:

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/targeting-u-s-citizens-govt-agencies-root-cause-wall-street-financial-crisis
BOOKMARK:
http://members.nowpublic.com/scrivener

Posted by: scrivener | September 19, 2008 12:08 PM

Americans are a bunch of total cry babies. They cry for anything. Bunch of Whiners! Vote McCain/Palin and they will kick you whimps into shape.

McCain/Palin 08
They ain't no whimps like you Americans

Posted by: Go USA | September 19, 2008 12:08 PM

boruch yona loriner, I was going to post the Obama-slumlord housing info separately (see below)

::::::::

How can anyone support Barry Obama when he let the poorest of the poor who elected him in Chicago freeze in slums in his district his friend and campaign contributor Rezok got $100M to repair or replace?

Obama knew, but did nothing.

That says everything.

Before you send any more of your, or your parent's, hard earned money to Barry Obama --

Please Watch this report on Obama, Obama's slums, Rezko, and $100M of wasted taxpayer money, from NBC news, Chicago's most respected TV news program.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDHsHM0laT8&feature=related

How do you explain away the fact that Barry Obama never followed up on the 11 slums that his friend Rezko was supposed to repair in Obama's district in Chicago, and continued to do nothing about the 40 slums that Rezko was supposed to repair or replace in Chicago, even after Obama joined the US Senate?

From the Chicago Sun Times:

For more than five weeks during the brutal winter of 1997, tenants shivered without heat in a government-subsidized apartment building on Chicago's South Side.

It was just four years after the landlords -- Antoin "Tony'' Rezko and his partner Daniel Mahru -- had rehabbed the 31-unit building in Englewood with a loan from Chicago taxpayers.

Rezko and Mahru couldn't find money to get the heat back on.

But their company, Rezmar Corp., did come up with $1,000 to give to the political campaign fund of Barack Obama, the newly elected state senator whose district included the unheated building....

The building in Englewood was one of 30 Rezmar rehabbed in a series of troubled deals largely financed by taxpayers. Every project ran into financial difficulty. More than half went into foreclosure, a Chicago Sun-Times investigation has found.

"Their buildings were falling apart,'' said a former city official. "They just didn't pay attention to the condition of these buildings.''

Eleven of Rezko's buildings were in Obama's state Senate district....

Rezko and Mahru had no construction experience when they created Rezmar in 1989 to rehabilitate apartments for the poor under the Daley administration. Between 1989 and 1998, Rezmar made deals to rehab 30 buildings, a total of 1,025 apartments. The last 15 buildings involved Davis Miner Barnhill & Galland during Obama's time with the firm.

Rezko and Mahru also managed the buildings, which were supposed to provide homes for poor people for 30 years. Every one of the projects ran into trouble:

* Seventeen buildings -- many beset with code violations, including a lack of heat -- ended up in foreclosure.

* Six buildings are currently boarded up.

* Hundreds of the apartments are vacant, in need of major repairs.

* Taxpayers have been stuck with millions in unpaid loans.

* At least a dozen times, the city of Chicago sued Rezmar for failure to heat buildings.

Barack Obama and his slumlord patron
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/353829,CST-NWS-rez23.article

Posted by: Donny | September 19, 2008 12:05 PM

Obama had to know this was coming. McCain may have some lobbyists working for him, but they did not make the decision to overstate Fannie's earnings by $11 billion while taking $100 million in bonuses; they did not make the decision to violate the Fannie Mae charter by buying massive amounts of subprime mortgage securities; and they did not make the decisions to deceive Fannie's stock and bondholders as to the company's true financial condition and risk profile. Jim Johnson and Frank Raines made those decisions, and Barack Obama made the decision to bring these corrupt men into his inner circle.

Posted by: someone who knows the truth | September 19, 2008 12:04 PM

Donny, you forgot the link to some Chicago newspaper outlining the patronage of Obama's political career by the slumlord Tony Rezko. How could you leave that out of a housing crisis article!

:::::

THE OBAMA FAMILY ESTATES -- NO FANNIE MAE FOR YOU!

Barack Obama lives in a Georgian mansion with 7 fireplaces that his slumlord, convicted corruption figure buddy, Tony Rezko helped him buy while helping a bagman who was laundering Iraqi oil-for-food program money

Barack Obama and his slumlord patron
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/353829,CST-NWS-rez23.article

Obama's half-brother George in Africa is living in a hut on less than a dollar a month. His brother doesn't even have an inside toilet. Obama could practically triple his brother George's annual income by sending him a $20 bill once a year. Or he could buy him an outhouse for twice that much.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/2590614/Barack-Obamas-lost-brother-found-in-Kenya.html

http://www.washtimes.com/news/2008/aug/26/the-inconvenient-obama/

George, who has met his brother only twice, has pictures of his brother that he has torn from newspapers, taped to his wall. He doesn't even have a real, signed picture from Barack.

Obama spent $6 million last month to move his one-time acceptance speech from the convention hall to a specially-built temple in a coliseum with fireworks, and his brother lives in a hut with no plumbing.

Posted by: boruch yona loriner | September 19, 2008 12:00 PM

I'm confused why isn't any of the news media mentioning Keating 5 and McCain's direct ties to that financial crisis..along with McCain's no knowledge of the economy and his backing of no deregulation of businesses..why is everyone covering for McCain. This is the biggest mess since the Keating 5 mess. Come on ad people with no ties to Obama..start reminding people of McCain's involvement in financial messes and falls like Bush...this is Republican leadership at work!!

Posted by: Deborah, Cincinnati, OH | September 19, 2008 11:58 AM

Airhead Aspergirl (i.e. Rush Limbaughette), while citing the LA Times article conveniently forgets the following stated in the article:

1. Obama's insistence over the past few years to increase regulation of Fannie and Freddie.

2.McCain campaign manager Rick Davis is past president of the Homeownership Alliance, an advocacy group whose members included Freddie and Fannie. In that role, he defended the companies against increased regulation.

3. Aquiles Suarez, head of lobbying for Fannie is now McCain's economic advisor

4. Charlie Black, lobbyist for Fannie, one of McCain's top aides.

Posted by: Jason | September 19, 2008 11:57 AM

THE OBAMA FAMILY ESTATES -- NO FANNIE MAE FOR YOU!

Barack Obama lives in a Georgian mansion with 7 fireplaces that his slumlord, convicted corruption figure buddy, Tony Rezko helped him buy while helping a bagman who was laundering Iraqi oil-for-food program money

Obama's brother George in Kenya is living in a hut on less than a dollar a month. His brother doesn't even have an inside toilet. Obama could practically triple his brother George's annual income by sending him a $20 bill once a year. Or he could buy him an outhouse for twice that much.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/2590614/Barack-Obamas-lost-brother-found-in-Kenya.html

http://www.washtimes.com/news/2008/aug/26/the-inconvenient-obama/

George, who has met his brother only twice, has pictures of his brother that he has torn from newspapers, taped to his wall. He doesn't even have a real, signed picture from Barack.

Obama spent $6 million last month to move his one-time acceptance speech from the convention hall to a specially-built temple in a coliseum with fireworks, and his brother lives in a hut with no plumbing.

Posted by: Donny | September 19, 2008 11:55 AM

We really need to cut through all the malarkey, and get down to brass tacks. KISS. McCain doesn't have a clue of an idea and all he wants to do is point fingers and fire people. IMPULSIVE. Great quality for a man who wants to be president. We know he's ready to bomb, bomb, bomb, Iran... and for a guy who admits his wife takes care of his finances, who doesn't understand how the economy works... well, why should anyone trust him, the guy who thinks Phil Gramm is a financial genius. Remember Gramm, the senator who along with McCain got us into the deregulation mode altogether?

I'm sure many people would describe John McCain in one word as maybe "Heroic, or Loyal". Then again... many might describe him as IMPULSIVE. If I had to describe Barack Obama in one word, I might suggest "Thoughtful, or Visionary". I'm sure that either would do a great job to protect this country if we are threatened with a clear and present danger, but I honestly feel that Senator Obama will do a much better job of bringing about positive change in our government that will benefit the vast majority of citizens, and will also do at least a 200% better job than the current administration or a McCain administration in repairing our broken relationship with the world community.

Posted by: Doctor G | September 19, 2008 11:54 AM

BTW, any Limbaugh-blog-robots want to question those 24 Fannie and Freddie Employees/Lobbyists who work for the McCain campaign?

Anyone?

Posted by: Donny | September 19, 2008 11:53 AM

Boruch, the hell you say! Rush Limbaugh actually spawned? Does the CDC know about this? Aspergirl, we only want to help.

Posted by: Donny | September 19, 2008 11:51 AM

What is funny about the ad is that it is not true. Another McCain lie. How sad.

Posted by: LawyerTom1 | September 19, 2008 11:48 AM

hes rush limbough's son!!!!!! hehe

Posted by: boruch yona loriner | September 19, 2008 11:41 AM

Let's also remember that Fannie Mae's current CEO, Daniel Mudd, who presided over the fiasco and just had to step down in disgrace, is actually a McCain supporter. Raines and Johnson are former Fannie Mae CEOs who have been gone from Fannie Mae for years.
who cares who he supports?

Posted by: boruch yona loriner | September 19, 2008 11:40 AM

THE BIRTH OF THE "SUBPRIME MORTGAGE" AS A FORM
OF FINANCIAL RACE-BASED AFFIRMATIVE ACTION

The Rest of the Meltdown Story
By Neal Boortz

"The political class would sure love for us to believe that the blame here rests squarely on “greedy” (try to define that word) mortgage brokers and lenders. The truth is that most of the blame rests on political meddling in the credit decisions of these mortgage lenders.

"Twenty years ago the buzz-word in the media was “redlining.” Newspapers across the country were filled with hard-hitting investigative reports about evil and racist mortgage lenders refusing to make real estate loans to various minorities and to applicants who lived in lower-income neighborhoods... Frankly, the claims that evil mortgage lenders were systematically denying loans to blacks and other minorities were a lot sexier on the radio than my claims that when credit histories, job stability, loan-to-value ratios and income levels were considered there was no evident racial discrimination.

"Political correctness won the day. Washington made it clear to banks and other lending institutions that if they did not do something .. and fast .. to bring more minorities and low-income Americans into the world of home ownership there would be a heavy price to pay. Congress set up processes (Research the Community Redevelopment Act) whereby community activist groups and organizers could effectively stop a bank’s efforts to grow if that bank didn’t make loans to unqualified borrowers. Enter, stage left, the “subprime” mortgage. These lenders knew that a very high percentage of these loans would turn to garbage – but it was a price that had to be paid if the bank was to expand and grow. We should note that among the community groups browbeating banks into making these bad loans was an outfit called ACORN. There is one certain presidential candidate that did a lot of community organizing for ACORN. I won’t mention his name so as to avoid politicizing this column.

"These garbage loans to unqualified borrowers were then bundled up and sold. The expectation was that the loans would be eventually paid off when rising home values led some borrowers to access their equity through re-financing and others to sell and move on up the ladder. Oops.

"Right now this crisis is being sold to the American public by the left as evidence the failure of the free market and capitalism. Not so. What we’re seeing is the inevitable result of political interference in free market economics. Acme bank didn’t want to loan money to Joe Homebuyer because Joe had a spotty job history, owed too much money on his credit cards, and wasn’t all that good at making payments on time. The politicians told Acme Bank to figure out a way to make that loan, because, after all, Joe is a bona-fide minority-American, or forget about opening that new branch office on the Southside. The loan was made under politicial pressure; the loan, with millions like it, failed – and now we are left to enjoy today’s headlines.

"So … why aren’t you reading the whole story in the mainstream media? Come on, are you kidding me?..."

more at: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/the_rest_of_the_meltdown_story.html

The further deregulation of the banking & finance industries during the Clinton administration and the easy-money policies started by Alan Greenspan started then, also set the stage for what would, during the Bush Administration, have grown to a finance bubble of poor mortgage-backed derivative products held by investment banks.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 19, 2008 11:35 AM

Aspergirl, are you really Rush Limbaugh?

Posted by: Donny | September 19, 2008 11:30 AM

I really feel sorry for McCain...he can't keep his foot out of his mouth. As for accusing Obama of Fannie/Freddie ties, people in glass houses should NOT throw stones.

The following McCain is a list of top aides and finance "bundlers" in McCain's campaign who were employed at Fannie, Freddie or BOTH (some as LOBBYISTS):

Wayne Berman (Fannie AND Freddie)
Charlie Black (Freddie)
Kirk Blalock (Fannie)
Carlos Bonilla (Freddie)
Mark Buse (Freddie)
Nicholas Calio (Fannie)
Alberto Cardenas (Fannie)
David Crane (Freddie)
Arthur Culvahouse (Fannie)
Alfonse D'Amato (Freddie)
Melissa Edwards (Freddie)
Richard Hohlt (Fannie)
Kate Hull (Fannie)
James Hyland (Freddie)
Aleix Jarvis (Fannie)
Thomas Loeffler (Fannie)
Peter Madigan (Fannie)
Alison McSlarrow (Fannie)
Susan Molinari (Freddie)
John Napier (Freddie)
Aquiles Suarez (Fannie)
Don Sundquist (Freddie)
William Timmons Sr (Freddie)
Vin Weber (Freddie)

So, McCain can either fire all these folks from his campaign (please anyone - check their resumes) or be a HYPOCRITE and attack Obama for something McCain is much more guilty of...

Enough said. I almost appears that working for or as a lobbyist for Fannie and Freddie was a job requirement for McCain's campaign.

TGIF

Posted by: Donny | September 19, 2008 11:26 AM

Report confirms Obama negotiated with Iraqi Foreign Minister Update: Taheri receiving death threats from Obama supporters
Sep 17, 2008 - Amir Taheri's September 15th has been, for all intents and purposes, confirmed over the past 24 hours. Obama did indeed conduct illegal foreign policy negotiations with Iraqi foreign minister Hoshyar Zebari. As we wrote on the 15th, this amounts to a truly audacious betrayal of the American people and our military, and deserves a full investigation by the American government, and scrutinization by the media. This from the American Spectator:
The Obama campaign spent more than five hours on Monday attempting to figure out the best refutation of the explosive New York Post report that quoted Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari as saying that Barack Obama during his July visit to Baghdad demanded that Iraq not negotiate with the Bush Administration on the withdrawal of American troops. Instead, he asked that they delay such negotiations until after the presidential handover at the end of January.

The three problems, according to campaign sources: The report was true, there were at least three other people in the room with Obama and Zebari to confirm the conversation, and there was concern that there were enough aggressive reporters based in Baghdad with the sources to confirm the conversation that to deny the comments would create a bigger problem.
There you have it, corroborating witnesses were present. On top of this the report goes on to say that the Obama campaign is not even bothering to really deny the charges, simply spin it in the hopes that his media devotees will simply sweep it under the rug like every other scandal.

America really needs some reporters with the testicular fortitude to start an investigation. Is the media so in the tank for Obama that they would go out of there way to ignore what might be one of the biggest breaches of trust of a presidential candidate in American history?

Chris Mathews (in)famously complained to Pat Buchanan that media access to Governor Sarah Palin was necessary for the American people to make an informed decision about her. Is this very same media, which demanded Palin postulate in front of them for the good of the people, going to allow this bombshell to go unscrutinized, withholding what could be crucial information necessary to making an informed decision in November? If so, their hypocrisy is not only deep, but dangerous.

Update: Amir Taheri is receiving death threats from Obama supporters. In his follow up opinion piece in today's NY Post, Taheri writes:
While I am encouraged by the senator's evolution, I must also appeal to him to issue a "cease and desist" plea to the battalions of his sympathizers - who have been threatening me with death and worse in the days since my article appeared.

Posted by: Scott | September 19, 2008 11:26 AM

A little government regulation could have prevented massive government intervention. ........
http://thefiresidepost.com/2008/09/19/government-regulations-thunder-road/

Posted by: Ohg Rea Tone | September 19, 2008 11:24 AM

Taxes are Patriotic.
War is Peace.
biden is crazy!!
where did you find this guy,
there was a reason no one
ever voted for him.
He has been delaware's
charity case,
America is very charitable.
Delaware has given joe
a chance to do nothing
for 26 years.

Posted by: usa3 | September 19, 2008 11:23 AM

Posted by: Barbara Campbell | September 19, 2008 11:21 AM

we obama supporters dont even
want the votes of stupid idiots
in redneck america,
we can win with just NY and Cal!!!

Posted by: simonsays | September 19, 2008 11:20 AM

if you hit obamabots with a rock,
YOUR CHIEF ECONOMIC EXPERT WAS
AN EXEC. WITH FRANNIE MAE.
you toss back stones,
well the third cousin of vinny
is a lobbyist!
BIDEN'S SON IS A LOBBYIST!
um... keating five keating five..
your shortcomings are NOW,
the ones you defend yourself with
were 1980's issues.
come to the present obamabots.
free thinking americans,
will wake up to the obamabot veil.

Posted by: usa3 | September 19, 2008 11:18 AM

WHERE DID FANNIE & FREDDIE COME FROM? (DEMOCRATS)

Fannie and Freddie were creations of the congressional Democrats and the Clinton Administration, intended to make mortgages available to more people who couldn't qualify easily to buy their own homes.

Fannie and Freddie have also been places for big Washington Democrats to go to work in the semi-private sector and pocket millions. The Clinton administration's White House Budget Director Franklin Raines ran Fannie and collected $50 million. Jamie Gorelick — Clinton Justice Department official — worked for Fannie and took home $26 million. Big Democrat Jim Johnson, recently on Obama's VP search committee, has hauled in millions from his Fannie Mae CEO job.

"Obama is the largest individual recipient [of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac donations] at about $112,000, federal campaign finance reports show...Republican nominee John McCain has taken $16,400 from Freddie and Fannie employees since 2005."

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-trailmoney9-2008sep09,0,1969729.story

THIS MESS STARTED DURING THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION

The bloat of the financial sector started during the Clinton years with his sweeping deregulation of commodity trading and investment banking that make things like the Enron loophole and the investment bank expansion into conflict of interest business areas possible. The Alan Greenspan print-money-to-drive-growth inflationary monetary expansion policies also started during the Clinton years. In essence, Clinton abandoned Rob Reich's labor-and-strong-infrastructure approach to building a strong economy and he went with Bob Rubin's use-finance-and-money-supply to inflate the economy via a fat financial sector.

Bush inherited and continued these policies, and, moreover, contributed more grossly inflationary and damaging problems by driving the federal deficit to massive, historic levels and completely ignoring the corrupt and greedy excesses and abuses of the financial sector.

Our problems were caused by the Clinton-era bubble-inducing deregulation & commodity trading loopholes, Bush's negligence & his huge federal deficits, and the immense bubble of speculation dollars created by our sending hundreds of billions of dollars abroad because we are so dependent on foreign oil.

In reality, all of these programs and policies were created by Democrats during the Clinton Administration: they created Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Clinton deregulated the investment banking sector and commodity trading to allow the (Enron) loopholes and other excesses Wall Street has been exploiting in recent years. In 2000, Clinton signed into law Phil Gramm's "Commodity Futures Modernization Act" that created, among other things, "the Enron Loophole". Democrats have been blocking drilling for oil, nuclear power and other energy-independence initiatives so that we must go deep into trade deficits for buying foreign oil, creating currency imbalances that undermines the value of our money at home and abroad, and, by extension, our financial system.

DEMOCRATS BLOCKED ATTEMPTS TO REGULATE FANNIE & FREDDIE

In the time since, Democrats have fought and blocked Republicans' attempts to limit or regulate Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac. in 2005, McCain predicted the collapse of the Mortgage market as he argued for passage of the Federal Housing Regulatory Act of 2005 that he co-sponsored. The Senate Democrats blocked the passage of the Bill and while it passed in the House it failed in the Senate because of the Democrats. Below is the text of McCain's speech:

'Mr. President, (referring to the Presiding Officer of the Senate) this week Fannie Mae’s regulator reported that the company’s quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were “illusions deliberately and systematically created” by the company’s senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.

'The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight’s report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae’s former chief executive officer, OFHEO’s report shows that over half of Mr. Raines’ compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets.

'The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac. The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator’s examination of the company’s accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005.

'These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform. For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs—and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO’s report this week does nothing to ease these concerns.

'In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO’s report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay. I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.

'I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.'

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 19, 2008 11:18 AM

Keating 5 -- now THOSE were connections.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 19, 2008 11:17 AM

Never mind that I had my own stinky connections, remember Charles Keating? Damn, I'd hoped most of you had forgotten. But hey, I am a hypocrite. I am willing to sacrifice my morals and honor, and any pretense to principle for the greater good.

I am John McCain and I approve this message.

Posted by: JohnMcCain | September 19, 2008 11:15 AM

O for 2.

Posted by: Goombay | September 19, 2008 11:13 AM

McCain's paltry attacks on Obama have missed their mark. Since the dirt-encrusted Republican has spent the past month flinging lies and scum, it is not surprising that this latest attack has been dismissed for the deceitful drivel that it is.

Obama has this week displayed the cool temperament, sound judgment, intelligence and gravitas to be president. His insights about the complex recipe needed to start fixing our ailing financial and economic structures have been remarkably accurate ever since he first ennunciated his proposals in four major speeches over the past nine months.

In contrast, this week the flip-flopping McCain has shown himself to be both a deregulator and a regulator, a cheerleader for the "fundamentals" and an hysteric tearing his hair out over the economic "crisis." He foolishly wanted to fire the SEC chair, when the president can't do that. He impotently wanted to set up a "911 commission" to study the financial collapse. He lied yet again about Obama's tax-cut program. He hid behind the flimsy glamour of Sarah "President" Palin. He offered a major snub to a major NATO ally, Spain. And oh, yeah, he invented the Blackberry.

McCain is in serious mental decline. Quite simply, he is not fit to be president.

Posted by: Revolver Trooper Palin | September 19, 2008 11:13 AM

The resch center was packed,
the line of people turned
away circled the Don Hutson
Practice Field.
People did the wave,
and cheered wildly.
I notice the media is
downplaying the buzz and
excitement out here in
America, where the voters
see one of our own,
Sarah Palin, and an american
hero who has spent his career
Voting AGAINST Government spending,
about to take washington
back from the special interests
Green Bay Backs McCain!

Posted by: steelworker for mccain | September 19, 2008 11:11 AM

John McCain did not ever support reform of the mortgage markets. He simply wanted Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac further privatized. That would have made the problem worse as at least there were some limits on Fannie and Freddie's behavior! Very duplicitous of McCain to say he warned of this in 2005!

Why is John McCain so duplicitous?

Posted by: Mary | September 19, 2008 11:05 AM

From: Nation of Village Idiots

Just a taste :)

"Let's just consider the money. The public bailout of insurance giant (becoming a dwarf) AIG is estimated at $85 billion. According to one report, that's more than the Bush administration spent on Aid to Families with Dependent Children during his entire time in office. That amount of money would also pay for health care for every man, woman, and child in America for at least six months.

How did we get here?

That's pretty easy to answer, too. His name is Phil Gramm. A few days after the Supreme Court made George W. Bush president in 2000, Gramm stuck something called the Commodity Futures Modernization Act into the budget bill. Nobody knew that the Texas senator was slipping America a 262 page poison pill. The Gramm Guts America Act was designed to keep regulators from controlling new financial tools described as credit "swaps." These are instruments like sub-prime mortgages bundled up and sold as securities. Under the Gramm law, neither the SEC nor the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) were able to examine financial institutions like hedge funds or investment banks to guarantee they had the assets necessary to cover losses they were guaranteeing.

This isn't small beer we are talking about here. The market for these fancy financial instruments they don't expect us little people to understand is estimated at $60 trillion annually, which amounts to almost four times the entire US stock market.

And Senator Phil Gramm wanted it completely unregulated. So did Alan Greenspan, who supported the legislation and is now running around to the talk shows jabbering about the horror of it all. Before the highly paid lobbyists were done slinging their gold card guts about the halls of congress, every one from hedge funds to banks were playing with fire for fun and profit.

Gramm didn't just make a fairy tale world for Wall Street, though. He included in his bill a provision that prevented the regulation of energy trading markets, which led us to the Enron collapse. There was no collapse of the house of Gramm, however, because his wife Wendy, who once headed up the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, took a job on the Enron board that provided almost $2 million to their household kitty. And why not? Wendy got a CFTC rule passed that kept the federal government from regulating energy futures contracts at Enron."

Posted by: Obama2008 | September 19, 2008 11:02 AM

Let's also remember that Fannie Mae's current CEO, Daniel Mudd, who presided over the fiasco and just had to step down in disgrace, is actually a McCain supporter. Raines and Johnson are former Fannie Mae CEOs who have been gone from Fannie Mae for years.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/14/AR2008091401571.html

Posted by: Mary | September 19, 2008 11:00 AM

From "McCain guru linked to subprime crisis"

"McCain and Gramm have a long political history. The two became close when they worked together as senators to defeat Hillary Rodham Clinton’s 1993 health care plan, holding meetings at hospitals and clinics across the country."

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9246.html


Read "A nation of village idiots" for more on Phil Gramm who was general co-chairman of McCain's campaign :) This is why I would prefer to stay away from the tactics of "ties" instead of positions and proposals. Otherwise, we'll just keep going around in circles.

Posted by: Obama2008 | September 19, 2008 10:59 AM

Someone ask McCain where we'd be right now if we tied Social Security to Wall Street investments like he's been wanting to do.

Posted by: DirtyHarry | September 19, 2008 10:55 AM

Posted by: Obama2008 | September 19, 2008 10:53 AM

Obama took money from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?
As a Senator?

Senator Obama took money from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?

Posted by: pete | September 19, 2008 10:50 AM

Barack Obama's Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac Connection
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
By John Gibson

"Lehman Brothers collapse is traced back to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two big mortgage banks that got a federal bailout a few weeks ago.

"Freddie and Fannie used huge lobbying budgets and political contributions to keep regulators off their backs.

"A group called the Center for Responsive Politics keeps track of which politicians get Fannie and Freddie political contributions. The top three U.S. senators getting big Fannie and Freddie political bucks were Democrats and No. 2 is Sen. Barack Obama.

"Now remember, he's only been in the Senate four years, but he still managed to grab the No. 2 spot ahead of John Kerry — decades in the Senate — and Chris Dodd, who is chairman of the Senate Banking Committee.

"Fannie and Freddie have been creations of the congressional Democrats and the Clinton White House, designed to make mortgages available to more people and, as it turns out, some people who couldn't afford them.

"Fannie and Freddie have also been places for big Washington Democrats to go to work in the semi-private sector and pocket millions. The Clinton administration's White House Budget Director Franklin Raines ran Fannie and collected $50 million. Jamie Gorelick — Clinton Justice Department official — worked for Fannie and took home $26 million. Big Democrat Jim Johnson, recently on Obama's VP search committee, has hauled in millions from his Fannie Mae CEO job...."

more at: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,423701,00.html

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 19, 2008 10:48 AM

Shut-up McCain has been in Washington for 40 years, please not buying none of it.

Posted by: What | September 19, 2008 10:46 AM

John McCain Warned Of Mortgage Collapse In 2005
By Ken Taylor - Posted on September 17th, 2008

"Barack Obama has been playing off the fears that are running rampant in the market because of the collapse of several of Wall Streets major investment companies like Lehman Brothers. Attacking John McCain and trying to create the idea that McCain does not know what he is talking about and that he is ignorant when it comes to the economy.

"For Mr. Obama's information John McCain saw this collapse coming as far back as 2005 and not only warned of the coming collapse but co-sponsored legislation to try and prevent it and go after the corruption that was causing much of the problem. Following is McCain's speech on the Senate floor during debate of Federal Housing Regulatory Act Of 2005 urging the Senate to pass the Act which fell to defeat after being blocked by Senate Democrats.

'Mr. President, (referring to the Presiding Officer of the Senate) this week Fannie Mae’s regulator reported that the company’s quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were “illusions deliberately and systematically created” by the company’s senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.

'The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight’s report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae’s former chief executive officer, OFHEO’s report shows that over half of Mr. Raines’ compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets.

'The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac. The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator’s examination of the company’s accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005.

'These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform. For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs—and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO’s report this week does nothing to ease these concerns.

'In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO’s report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay. I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.

'I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.'

"Senate Democrats blocked the passage of the Bill and while it passed in the House it failed in the Senate because of the Democrats."

more at: http://theminorityreportblog.com/blog_entry/ken_taylor/2008/09/17/john_mccain_warned_of_mortgage_collapse_in_2005

Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac are democrat creations, by the way, riddled by democrats. Obama's organization itself is riddled with Fannie Mae executives.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 19, 2008 10:43 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2009 The Washington Post Company