Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Echoes of Gramm by McCain in Michigan

By Michael D. Shear
Is Sen. John McCain unconsciously channeling his old friend, Phil Gramm, who left the campaign this summer after saying the country was in a "mental recession"? Or is Gramm still acting the part of loyal McCain message man, despite the rift?

Either way, the two have been hewing to a similar line of late when it comes to talking about the economy. In a speech in Michigan this evening, McCain said: "If you like what tax increases have done to the economy here in Michigan, you're going to love Senator Obama's tax increases. And we won't do it. Governor Palin and I will not raise anyone's taxes. The worst thing you can do is raise taxes in difficult times."

That is remarkably similar to the title of a Wall Street Journal editorial Gramm penned on Sept. 13, the title of which was: "If You Like Michigan's Economy, You'll Love Obama's."

McCain officials have said repeatedly that Gramm, while still a close friend of McCain's, is no longer affiliated with the campaign. He had been a co-chairman.

By Web Politics Editor  |  September 17, 2008; 8:19 PM ET
Categories:  John McCain  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Bishops Use iPods to Lure Faithful Voters
Next: Obama Zings McCain's 'Old Boy Network'

Comments

McCain and Bush sitting in a tree,

DEregulating fast as can be,

First comes Gramm, then comes the SubPrime,

Then comes McBush with the Regulator!

Posted by: JustAM | September 20, 2008 12:44 AM | Report abuse

Well, we should just let the rich keep their money and let the free market reign. After all, it has worked pretty well so far. Aren't the people that run the free markets at Bear Stearns rich? How about the people that are in charge at Lehman Bros.? Merrill Lynch? The Macs? ( not meaning McCain, although if the shoe fits) How about the CEOs of AIG? Oh, that would be us!

Posted by: J Lauber | September 18, 2008 5:42 PM | Report abuse

McCain lives on Bizarro World. What tax increases is he talking about in Michigan? I guarantee you half the people (the ones that could think) in that room said to themselves.. WFT? Our taxes were cut.

McCain is out of touch, not just with Americans, but reality.

Posted by: DDS | September 18, 2008 3:29 PM | Report abuse

Obama had told the Iraqis they should not rush through a "Strategic Framework Agreement" governing the future of U.S. troops until after President Bush leaves office.

Smart move on Obama's part if this is in fact true. Bush has already screwed up royally here in what he'd been allowed to do, why let him exacerbate the situation further. Let the next president, whoever that may be sort this thing out, with a fresh perspective. The latter obviously excludes McCain.

Posted by: str8up | September 18, 2008 2:36 PM | Report abuse

should read 'de-regulation.

Posted by: str8up | September 18, 2008 2:27 PM | Report abuse

It was Phil Gramm who said the only thing wrong with the economy is the whining populace. So it makes sense to me that McCain who highly values Gramm's knowledge on the matter of the economy, given that he, McCain is abhorrently ignorant on the subject. It is why in the face of a financial meltdown, McCain said the economy is fundamentally sound. After a career of advocating regulation now he is for oversight, and advocates the firing of the SEC chief. This old relic needs a job entertaining the troops. They need some comic relief.

Posted by: str8up | September 18, 2008 2:26 PM | Report abuse

ELECTION 2008
Obama camp confirms troop pullout delay plan
Spokeswoman denies report; ends up affirming main claim

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: September 16, 2008
12:45 pm Eastern

© 2008 WorldNetDaily

The Obama campaign issued an angry denial to a report yesterday that the Democratic presidential candidate privately urged Iraqi leaders to delay U.S. troop withdrawals, but the statement essentially confirmed the story.

Responding to a column by Iranian-born analyst Amir Taheri in the New York Post, Obama spokeswoman Wendy Morigi insisted Obama "has never urged a delay in negotiations, nor has he urged a delay in immediately beginning a responsible drawdown of our combat brigades."

But in the same statement, Morigi said Obama had told the Iraqis they should not rush through a "Strategic Framework Agreement" governing the future of U.S. troops until after President Bush leaves office, the Associated Press reported.

Further, according to the New York Times in a report on June 16, Obama himself has confirmed his actions.

Recalling his meeting with Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama said in the Times report, "My concern is that the Bush administration, in a weakened state politically, ends up trying to rush an agreement that in some ways might be binding to the next adminsitration, whether it's my administration or Senator McCain's administration. The foreign minister agreed that the next administration should not be bound by an agreement that's currently made."

Zebari had confirmed in the report that Obama "asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the U.S. elections and the formation of a new administration."

In his column, Taheri wrote about the meeting between Zebari and Obama, in which Obama urged a delay in the withdrawal of American forces.

Taheri states Obama insisted it was in Iraq's best interest to avoid an agreement negotiated by the Bush administration in its "state of weakness and political confusion."

That private position would be a stark contrast to Obama's public record.

"The best way to protect our security and to pressure Iraq's leaders to resolve their civil war is to immediately begin to remove our combat troops," Obama said last year at a university in Iowa. "Not in six months or one year – now."

In January of last year, Obama offered legislation on the floor of the Senate called the Iraq War De-escalation Act of 2007, which called for troop withdrawals to begin in May 2007 and to conclude by March 2008.

And in his New York Times editorial released the same month the senator toured the Middle East, Obama wrote, "The call by Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki for a timetable for the removal of American troops from Iraq presents an enormous opportunity. We should seize this moment to begin the phased redeployment of combat troops that I have long advocated."

Taheri reported that Iraqi President Jalal Talabani's advisers wonder if Obama is privately working to delay troop withdrawal until after the election in order to claim credit – should Obama win the presidency – for ending the war.

"Indeed, say Talabani's advisers," reports Taheri, "a President Obama might be tempted to appropriate the victory that America has already won in Iraq by claiming that his intervention transformed failure into success."

The Obama campaign has not responded to WND's request for a response to the Post column.


Posted by: Scott | September 18, 2008 1:37 PM | Report abuse

It is very clear that McCain wants to renew the Bush tax cuts and avoid taxing oil companies. Also,he wants employees to add a new tax,that will be on their health coverage payments by their employer. That is not advertised.
Obama does want to reverse the Bush tax cuts back to what they were under Clinton (remember the good old surplus days?)This will affect incomes of greater then $300,000 mainly..He wants to tax the oil companies their fair share.(Just as Palin did in Alaska this last year).
He will lower taxes on incomes from $30.000 to $250,000 and this will be a significant tax cut.
Now,is"nt it a bit of a stretch to accuse Obama of Tax increase when the real Question is which income group should get the tax cut. Its pretty clear which group each supports.

Posted by: RHead | September 18, 2008 12:14 PM | Report abuse

"Make no mistake, Obama is a great liar; he wants to tax, tax, tax ... "
Posted by: Ionlytellthetruth | September 18, 2008 2:56 AM

What he is saying but can't quit get it out is that Obama will be the first person in history to raise taxes and yet the tax burden for 95% of Americans will go down. 75% of Americans will have a lower tax bite than McCain's plan. The reason is that study that McCain quotes was incomplete and McCain has been apprised of this but continues the same claim. Lonlytellthetruth, the truth has escaped you.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 18, 2008 11:19 AM | Report abuse

There is difference between Obama and McCain in the way they look at life. Obama is hopeful and looks for opportunity and McCain is cynical and only sees the worst in things.


To see what I am talking about look at the following:
NM Moderate | September 18, 2008 10:27 AM

The McCain supporter wants to blame someone and does not talk about solutions to problems. The Obama supporter is not cynical and sees a logical explanation. Like Obama solutions are important to him.

Vote for a president who thinks that government is a problem and what you get is government is a government that does not work, as an example Geo Bush. John McCain wants a government that does nothing except fight wars.

Obama is a president who wants the government to solve problems that business and individuals can not solve. That is why he has solutions to this economic crisis. It is government who should build infrastructure and can get this economy back on its feet so these debts get paid and they don't default.

Obama does not want the government to do what the private sector can't. It is a little known fact that Medicare cost of operations is 5%. Insurance company health care plans are 4-6 times that figure. That does not mean there should not be private health care but if the government can compete without stacking the deck in its favor that it should. This is an economy that thrives on competition and if you can compete and produce you should be allowed.

Republicans try to brain wash you to believe that Obama is a socialist and against competition. Were that true I would not support him. What I want is an economy that is working and this one is not.

Posted by: Co Mander | September 18, 2008 11:04 AM | Report abuse

If you like McBush's Economy, you LOVE McSame's!

Posted by: Phil McCrevice | September 18, 2008 10:46 AM | Report abuse

Michael D. Shear,

When we have "The War of The Free", I'm coming for you...

Posted by: Shear is DONE! | September 18, 2008 10:45 AM | Report abuse

Make no mistake, Obama is a great liar; he wants to tax, tax, tax, and downgrand the military and our defense system so that we will be very vunerable; he has recently changed on that but will if elected go back to his way of thinking. He's so radical that he is almost communist.

Posted by: Ionlytellthetruth | September 18, 2008 2:56 AM

You are the one that sounds like a total nutjob! How could it be in Obama's interest to destroy our economy and our military? Certainly, even if you don't like the guy (that is your right), you have to admit that he is pretty bright. Have you ever read any of his books (which he wrote himself) or visited his website to see a detailed discussion of his stance on the issues? No? I uderstand that it wouldn't fit into your narrative, but you really ought to find out the facts before you go spouting off the BS you put in your post.

Posted by: NM Moderate | September 18, 2008 10:39 AM | Report abuse

McCain's economic policy was to give tax cuts to the rich to invest and create new jobs. That is equivalent to beating a tired horse. Obama's plan is to cut taxes for consumers and spend, pay off debt or save, all three are helpful. Also Obama wants to create jobs in the rebuilding of infrastructure that will stimulate the economy. That is like resting a tired horse and allowing another one to do the job.

That is what Obama means when he says change. We need to change the economy so that it works for us.

Posted by: Sal E Mander | September 18, 2008 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Why is Obama so high on the Fannie Mae donation list and McCain so low? Like your CHOSEN ONE you don't answer the issue I raise, you punt and bring up George Bush instead....pathetic....BUT on the issue YOU raised- You have the BIGGEST of Fannie Mae "BIGWIGS"
in your list of advisors- he was actually chosen to vett the VP before his COUNTRYWIDE connections did him in, right Stan?????
By the way Stan, Why has the Obama campaign REFUSED to release a list of its advisors?
Posted by: Scott | September 18, 2008 9:21 AM

Yo Scott. Maybe the majority of the employees at Fannie and Freddie think that Obama's economic plan wil be better for the economy and the housing market than McCain's (non)plan. Those contributions for Obama are not official contributions from the company, they are merely the result of individuals from that complany making a choice on who they wnat to be the next President.

Posted by: NM Moderate | September 18, 2008 10:27 AM | Report abuse

MORE HAS CAME OUT TODAY ABOUT PALINS ALLEDGED AFFAIR.
http://www.theveep.com

MORE PEOPLE SET TO TESTIFY IN TROOPER GATE
IS PALIN DONE? http://www.hotpres.com

DID PALIN VOTE FOR RON PAUL IN THE PRIMARIES?? http://www.BarrPaul08.com

Posted by: Anonymous | September 18, 2008 10:23 AM | Report abuse

McCain has shown no understanding of the seriousness of the problem and now voices only blame but no solutions. He said that the fundamentals of the economy are strong on the day Lehman Bros announced bankruptcy and AIG announced its problems. He shouts about the greed of Wall Street but he never spoke up about the need for more regulation and blustered how he was for deregulation.

Obama offers solutions, he offers jobs through infrastructure construction and constructive regulation to protect America's savings and pensions. McCain offers no jobs and regulation that will punish Wall Street but will not help ordinary Americans.

Obama will protect America's financial future. McCain does not know how. Obama has spoken about more regulation for two years. McCain has talked about it for two days and only after his ignorance hit him in the face

Posted by: Jerry Mander | September 18, 2008 10:14 AM | Report abuse

APalinFan, "Predatory lending" only came into its own in the past several years, do the math, these were typically three to five year loans at the low rate before the higher rate kicked in. I personally never understood how people could be suckered by this ruse. So, the ARMs started to shift in earnest last year which started this steamroller running.

Posted by: DikesforPalin | September 18, 2008 9:44 AM | Report abuse

"McCain said: "If you like what tax increases have done to the economy here in Michigan, you're going to love Senator Obama's tax increases "

And if you've liked the last eight years of Bush, you'll love the next four years of McBush.

What tax increases is McBush talking about in MI ?

We've had income tax cuts and stock dividend tax cuts since 2001 nationwide. And we've borrowed the money to fund them along with the money to fight Bush's Iraqi crusade.

Tax policy has nothing to do with the mortgage meltdown, the foreclosure crisis, the wall street meltdown or the auto makers in MI losing market share to other country's auto industries.

And MCBush's plan is Bush's plan. Continue borrowing hundreds of billions of dollars to extend Bush's tax cuts and continue to fight his Iraqi war (and maybe start another one with Iran).

IOW four more years of the same !

Posted by: MA | September 18, 2008 9:25 AM | Report abuse

Hey Stan,
Why is Obama so high on the Fannie Mae donation list and McCain so low? Like your CHOSEN ONE you don't answer the issue I raise, you punt and bring up George Bush instead....pathetic....BUT on the issue YOU raised- You have the BIGGEST of Fannie Mae "BIGWIGS"
in your list of advisors- he was actually chosen to vett the VP before his COUNTRYWIDE connections did him in, right Stan?????
By the way Stan, Why has the Obama campaign REFUSED to release a list of its advisors?

Hey Stan, here's
George Will on yet another reason to vote McCain/Palin-

"Divided government compels compromises that curb each party's excesses, especially both parties' proclivities for excessive spending when unconstrained by an institution controlled by the other party. William Niskanen, chairman of the libertarian Cato Institute, notes that in the last 50 years, "government spending has increased an average of only 1.73 percent annually during periods of divided government. This number more than triples, to 5.26 percent, for periods of unified government."

By picking Palin, McCain got the country's attention. That is a perishable thing and before it dissipates, he should show the country his veto pen."

Bye Stan

Posted by: Scott | September 18, 2008 9:21 AM | Report abuse

Hey Scott, Obama getting 40 grand a year in political contributions from Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac doesn't make him exactly beholden to their wishes when you consider it's part of a fundraising effort of hundreds of millions.

On the other hand, one of the AIG bigwigs is one of the bigwigs of McCain's campaign. Wonder how much of that George Bush 85 billion dollar tax-payer funded nationalization called a 'rescue package' is going into his pocket, or will somehow go to benefit the McCain campaign. Funny how McCain did a complete 180 turn on that one in just the space of a day or two.

Posted by: stan | September 18, 2008 8:39 AM | Report abuse

The Gramm-Leach-Bliley act was signed by President Clinton, not Bush. See the article "The Legacy of the Clinton Bubble" at this link http://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/?article=1229
Here's a quote from the article:
"Predatory lending was not an invention of the Bush administration. High-interest payday loans and subprime mortgages took off under Clinton."

Posted by: APalinFan | September 18, 2008 8:24 AM | Report abuse

And speaking of taxes, Ionlytellthetruth, our taxes are going up now no matter who's president, thanks to these financial shenanigans going on right now, and all of the multi million dollar bonuses the CEO's of these failed instituions get.

But I guess you probably think I'm just having a "mental recession"....

Posted by: R. Nixon | September 18, 2008 6:51 AM | Report abuse

John McCain is to blame for our economy!

The link below is from McCain's own website listing his Senate Committee Assignments.

http://mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=IssuesLegislation.CommitteeAssignments

For 7 of the last 11 years, McCain was Chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, & Transportation. During this period it was HIS leadership that drove an unprecedented period of DEregulation. Now McCain is wondering who was "asleep at the switch" in our government and vows to increase regulation to fix it.

If you look carefully at each of the areas within the scope of the committees he lead and ask yourself whether our country's position got better or worse under his leadership - the answer is a great big NO! In fact, we've experienced some of the worst disasters in our history. It is STUNNING how consistently horrible his leadership has been.

McCain is a walking disaster in almost every area where he inserts his "leadership". As Ranking member on the Armed Services committee he betrayed our veterans when he opposed a measure for an increase in our benefits (which was passed without his vote or support). The members of our Armed Services and their families have been stetched beyond the breaking point no thanks to John McCain.

Wake up America and realize that John McCain is exactly the kind of shameless Washington Politician that he is now promising to stand up AGAINST. We can't afford anymore McCain disasters.

He will ruin our country if he is elected. Please, I beg you learn more about his true track record before voting for him to be our 44th President.


Posted by: Veteran against McCain | September 18, 2008 6:45 AM | Report abuse

Speaking of Communism, Ionlytellthetruth, what do you think of the government buying out all of these investment firms? The government owning our financial institutions????? Free market capitalism? I don't think so. It's communism, plain and simple.

It's typical banana-republican hypocrisy!!!

Posted by: R. Nixon | September 18, 2008 6:28 AM | Report abuse


McCain: The candidate of ‘Changing his Position’ to get your vote, America!

Like Bush, McCain has proven himself ...that he will say anything for votes!


It’s clear that John McCain would rather lose his integrity than lose an election!


McCain lies like ‘the same old Bush!’

McCain = Bush = McBush!


Posted by: Independent | September 18, 2008 4:54 AM | Report abuse

Deanna, you are one of the millions that Obama has brainwashined like Hitler brainwashed he Germans. Obama will have this country so taxed and socialist that we will be like Cuba, China, Russia, etc.
Make no mistake, Obama is a great liar; he wants to tax, tax, tax, and downgrand the military and our defense system so that we will be very vunerable; he has recently changed on that but will if elected go back to his way of thinking. He's so radical that he is almost communist.

Posted by: Ionlytellthetruth | September 18, 2008 2:56 AM | Report abuse

I knew Eric in high school. He was a precocious but confused young man, plagued by gender identity issues fostered by an abusive upbringing. Rumor had it that his mother would regularly hit him in the head with a hammer - which explained, if not excused, his astonishing confusion. If you support Hillary vote for McCain? Apparently Eric suffers to this day.

Posted by: Paul Nicholas Boylan | September 18, 2008 2:31 AM | Report abuse

McCain should have chosen Romney or someone who knows about economics as his VP instead of that celebrity moose woman.

With economic advisers like Fiorina (the CEO who nearly killed Hewlett-Packard) and Gramm, how can people have any confidence in McCain? If we've already been driven into the ground by Bush, a McCain presidency would be Journey to the Center of the Earth.

Just read how McCain adviser Gramm helped screw everyone over:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/outlook/6007788.html

Posted by: Ron | September 18, 2008 2:27 AM | Report abuse

I think the chances of Hillary running in 2012 are remote and the chances of her winning the primary much lower still. The damage Hillary did to the democratic party and the Obama ticket were tremendous and will not be forgiven easily. Hillary had a virtually zero mathamatical chance of winning as far back as the first of second month of 08 but she stayed in with the hope of scaring the voters into electing her (and in the hope that something really bad would come out about Obama). By staying in and fighting with Obama instead of bowing out graciously when she knew she couldn't win, she may have cost the Democrats the election. I don't think that behavior is likely to be rewarded by the voters with another chance in 4 years if McCain wins.

Posted by: captbilly | September 18, 2008 2:24 AM | Report abuse

Eric is a Republican, pay him no mind..

Posted by: JOE | September 18, 2008 2:18 AM | Report abuse

McCain is led on the economy by Phil Gramm who is a bare-knuckle fighter against oversight of Wall St. Anyone like McCain who says the economy is fundamentally sound and then says what he means is that he has confidence in the soundness of the American worker is, to be kind, confused in their thinking. He clearly lives in a dream world - if you have a family assets in excess of $100M you can afford to. The economy is teetering on the brink of disaster due to Bush tax policies for the past eight years along with the laissez-faire attitude toward Wall Street. McCain is far outside his element when it comes to the economy and it becomes clearer every time he says anything about it. Is he unaware that Bush through his unrelenting degradation of all federal agencies including the SEC has let the Wall Street investment banking community leverage themselves into a crisis that resembles a potential Stock Market Crash of 1929. Tax payers will have trillions in debt to pay off before this is over. McCain backed him on these polices 100%. He can run from being a Republican and from Bush, but he cannot hide.

Posted by: jefflz | September 18, 2008 2:16 AM | Report abuse

Agree with the poster that asked Eric to settle down. What Eric and the other PUMAs don't realize is that Hillary has already blown her chance at the Presidency. She had a tough sell to make anyway for everyone that was suffering from Clinton fatigue (strike one), or didn't like her style and abrasiveness (strike two). Finally, with the division she created within the party, and the near-fatal bashing of Obama that she resorted to in desperation, she alienated way more than the 18 million people that voted for her (strike three: she's out).

If Obama loses, there's no way any of his voters will even consider her in 4 years after what she's done - and the rest of the country will be so ready to move along even further from the Clintons.

She needs to look at the big picture, and either focus on becoming a great Senate leader like Kennedy, or hope for a position in the Obama administration or on the Supreme Court.

So Eric and all the (non-Republican-poser) PUMAs need to heed her advice - do what's right for the country. We can't afford four more years of Republican rule in this country, and we certainly can't afford it in the form of John McCain or (God forbid) Sarah Palin.

Use your heads!

Posted by: Tom in Northern VA | September 18, 2008 1:37 AM | Report abuse

Phil Gramm called Ron Paul last Wednesday to urge him to endorse McCain, lol like that was ever going to happen. I would say he's still around. No rift at all, two peas in a pod, if you like the current economic crisis, thank Phil Gramm and the people who enabled him to wreck all of the regulation, and safe guards put into place after the last depression, like John McCain.

Posted by: Ima Mad | September 18, 2008 1:14 AM | Report abuse

ERIC....Please stop it with the Hillary running in 2012 stuff. You don't where Hillary may be in 4 years. Either way Hillary will have a tough time running again at 65 years of age in 2012. If Obama wins and becomes a great president like I know he would, then Hillary is out till 2016 in which she will be too old. If McCain becomes president, he will probably serve one term in which Gov. Sarah Palin would have had 4 years of Vice President experience. A 2nd term Senator Hillary Clinton would lose to a former Governor and current VP Sarah Palin in 2012. Her resume and personality would be too strong, especially if McCain/Palin didn't screw up the country too terribly more than GW Bush.

So give it a rest and Vote for 2008 Democratic Presidential ticket so there will be a future!

Posted by: Obama-Junkie | September 18, 2008 12:20 AM | Report abuse

McCain, the economist prodigy who will lead our contry to to prosperity...barf.

Posted by: tom | September 18, 2008 12:15 AM | Report abuse

Does McCain honestly think anyone is still listening to his lie about Obama raising taxes? LOL ONLY a fool would believe that one these days...or a blind republican. Yes Obama will raise taxes on those making above 250 thousand a year but for the middle class? Tax cuts are on the way and eveyone knows if even if ole Lying dogs McCain and Palin can't say it out loud!

Posted by: Deanna | September 18, 2008 12:11 AM | Report abuse

Graham is hurting Mr. McCain.
First, he is not respected and has two many quotable events around him. The financial crisis really makes Graham a bad smell. Mr. McCain better keep Graham's involvement more underground.

The Obama team are smart and they will be bringing out zingers especially those tide to Mr McCain/Mrs. Palins tax lies. These tax lies just like the other blizzard of lies will come back and McCain/Palin are going to look like the opposite of reformers. They are going to look like good ole boys and cronies or rather crooks.

That's not a good picture.

Posted by: lucy2008 | September 17, 2008 11:50 PM | Report abuse

Vote for Obama and you will have DESTROYED Hilary's chance at becoming
President!!

Consider this:
If you elect Obama for 2008 , Hillary CAN'T RUN IN 2012!! The
incumbent always runs for their party in reelection.

Hillary will then be 69 when she gets a chance to run as democrat.
Then people will call her old(like they do McCain who is 72) and she
will NEVER become President.

Reagan was 69 when he got elected but he wasn't trying to break the
glass ceiling at the same time.

So if you care at all about Hillary, you will VOTE AGAINST Obama this
time around. Plus, you will break the glass ceiling and Hillary WILL
BE THERE in 2012!!

Think about it!! It makes sense!!

If you support Hillary, YOU MUST VOTE AGAINST OBAMA!!!

Posted by: Eric | September 17, 2008 11:40 PM | Report abuse

n a few weeks we will make a choice that will decide our future.
This time the stakes are much higher then most people could imagine
I would like to point out some things You may already know with a new perspective.
I follow a economist named bob proctor who has called the top and bottom of every market crash since the 70s correctly.
He perfectly predicted the current real estate market meltdown ,and the picture he paints about what will happen in the next couple years
Is terrifying. He thinks it could get worse then the great depression.
Banks in the US are going under one after the other. Country wide the largest morgage bank in the world
Bear Stearns and Lehman brothers , and Merrill Lynch which are 3 out of the top 5 wall street firms.
And now Fanny and Freddy which hold 50 percent of the home loans in the United States.
The goverment took them over because they are essentially bankrupt.
If they didn't the entire financially system would virtually shut down, the stock market would crash
And we would suffer beyond what any of us have seen before
The future of these companies will fall into the hands of our next president
And all of our economic future depends on them reorganizing these companies right.
Lehman, Merill Lynch, and Bear Sterns have survived for over 150 years and survived even the great depression
They are important because the are the biggest engines of growth in america and
they are connected to almost everything.
The last time the real estate market numbers looked this bad was during
The great depression and real estate often leads the way into major economic recessions.
One out of 10 Americans is somewhere in the foreclosure process.
During the last 8 years the average person saw there salary drop instead
Of increase. These are all facts no one will argue with.
The truth is we are only in the start of the worst economy we have seen in our generation
and a very real possibility of another depression.
Bush just like Mcain doesn't understand the economy.
That not just my opinion its his own words. Not only does he not understand how to fix it
He does not understand exactly what is broken. Its no surprise that he doesnt. The people that make up these
securities use complex math models very few people understand.
They are basically bundles of thousand of loans some good and some bad that are then given rules based on quantitiative
math. It will take the best and brightest minds in the world to get us out of this, and the same things bush and mcain have done for the last 8 years
Have not worked so far and wont work in the future.
If you do what you have always done then you will do get what you have always __________
90 percent of the time they have voted the same.
Please don't just take my word for it Start to read up on some of this yourself. MSN money, elliot wave and, bloomberg
Have tons of articles That prove we are in the heading into one of the worst economies any one has ever seen.
So why are the polls even close then ?
The chairman of mcains campaign recently said that people don't vote on issues
they vote on a personality composite which means. He is trying to sell personality instead
of results.
He believes people will vote against there own self interests.
Lets teach him we are smarter then that and elect the ticket that can
bring us back from the brink of a economic abyss.
If you think i am kidding do your own home work you will find
We are at the start of this mess not the end.
Mcain admits in the year 2008 he cannot use a computer even to send email
Its almost impossible then he will understand the complex securities such as cdos that are destroying wall street
and the home values on your street.
We are not bulletproof america it time to wake up and hold these people accountable.
How many people that you go out and have drinks with would you really want running the country?
Lets stand up and fight for our country now while it will still make a difference
Lets elect Obama Biden 08
Mccain straight out lied in his convention speech when he said that he would lower taxes for the common man while Obama would raise the taxes. Yes! Obama will raise taxes but not for the common man but for the wealthiest top 5% of the American people in which Mccain is included. And by the way political analysts agree that Obama's tax policy is more beneficial for the common man because he is going to decrease taxes for 95% of Americans which has to include the common man because a common man is not 5% of the American population.
!!!!!!!The Truth is Mccain lies and deceives voters like in his convention speech where he presented the incomplete truth about his policies.!!!!!1
By the Way Grant was also a military hero who won because of his character. And his term was full of corruption. Why?
it is because he had no clue about wat the common man experiences just like MCcain and Palin. Well for all of u who claim that Obama is too young and inexperienced and young to be president. Guess wat? Mccain is too old to be president and fighting as a soldier is different from commanding a whole country's army and handling the economy (which does not only depend on the fundamentals (workers) but on the policies of the president for investors to invest in a crashing economy)and Palin is the worst possible VP candidate because she has no foreign policy experience which is needed in diplomatic relationships with other nations which the VP is responsible for. And being incharge of the Alaskan National Guard which had no crisis to face is not a qualification to be 2nd to commander in chief.
Obama on the other hand is willing to go against issues because of his minimal exposure to the corruption in washington.
For example, he opposed the War in Iraq which mccain supported just because the oil prices would go up leading to more profits for people like Bush and others in washington who own an oil drilling facility.
Mccain is just like Bush who deceived the public and charged into the War in Iraq (very similar to Vietnam war which had no reason but destroyed that country). Mccain lied to the public in his convention speech on his and Obama's tax policy for the common man.
And Bidden is a very good choice for VP because the VP is supposed to be the invisible leader of the Senate and maintain diplomatic relationships with foreign countries( Bidden was in the senate in charge of Foreign policy)
i say Mccain would be a good VP candidate because of his foriegn policy experience and long time in the Senate but asking him to be president is going too far. Having good character does not mean he is right on policies ( especially regarding the economy and the common man).
Go Obama and Bidden the better qualified ticket for the Presidency and the VP.

Posted by: no Mcain | September 17, 2008 11:40 PM | Report abuse

MORE HAS CAME OUT TODAY ABOUT PALINS ALLEDGED AFFAIR.
http://www.theveep.com

MORE PEOPLE SET TO TESTIFY IN TROOPER GATE
IS PALIN DONE? http://www.hotpres.com

DID PALIN VOTE FOR RON PAUL IN THE PRIMARIES?? http://www.BarrPaul08.com

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 11:36 PM | Report abuse

Alan Chernoff's CNN Report on Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac Buying Influence in Washington DC- Guess who DID take their money in a BIG way (yep B. Obama):


"Freddie Mac (FRE, Fortune 500) spent over $94.8-million on lobbyists since 1998, making it the nation's 12th-largest lobbying client, while Fannie Mae (FNM, Fortune 500) bought $79.5-million of influence, the 20th biggest spender, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

"They wanted to fend off regulation of their enterprises," said Massie Ritsch of the Center.

Until recent months, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac largely succeeded in that effort - functioning with relatively little oversight as they aggressively grew their portfolio of mortgages to try to increase earnings.

Campaign contributions bought influence as well, including donations to the presidential candidates.

Sen. Barack Obama is the No. 3 recipient of Fannie and Freddie campaign dollars, having collected $123,000 from the companies since he first ran for the Senate in 2004, according to the Federal Election Commission and the Center for Responsive Politics.

The former chief executive of Fannie Mae, James Johnson, was the original head of Obama's vice presidential search team. Johnson resigned from Obama's campaign amid controversy over discounted home loans he had received.

Sen. John McCain has received $19,000 from the two companies in the past ten years."
________

That's $40,000 a year for Obama and $1900 a year for McCain- Wow, Obama what do you owe them in return?

Posted by: Scott | September 17, 2008 11:27 PM | Report abuse

Hacking and publishing Gov. Palin's Yahoo account was a bad move by who ever did it. If they had any real damning emails they should have released them up front because after today they will be of no value. People that support Obama will believe them and blog about how bad they are; McCain supporters will be outraged because it reinforces the premise that she is being treated unfairly; and undecided voters will not trust the content of any email message because they cannot be verified and for that reason, it supports the premise that she is being treated unfairly. Further, no one, liberal, conservative, or middle of the road American wants to see their privacy invaded.
Anything released will be denied and frankly cannot be proven. If you can hack the account, you can change the email message. My guess is in the coming days other emails will be released that will cast Palin in a bad light. John McCain’s camp and conservative media will say the messages have been doctored and the American people will believe them because in the end, the emails were stolen and who can trust a thief? The left leaning media will never be able to verify anything because no one will ever come forward to be interviewed because it will reveal their identity and if they get caught, they will go to jail. Again, if the media runs any possible story without verifiable proof it is further proof that the media is out to get her. This was a really stupid move. The risk in this case was much greater than any potential reward.

Posted by: Dr Jack | September 17, 2008 11:27 PM | Report abuse

Alan Chernoff's CNN Report on Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac Buying Influence in Washington DC- Guess who DID take their money in a BIG way (yep B. Obama):


"Freddie Mac (FRE, Fortune 500) spent over $94.8-million on lobbyists since 1998, making it the nation's 12th-largest lobbying client, while Fannie Mae (FNM, Fortune 500) bought $79.5-million of influence, the 20th biggest spender, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

"They wanted to fend off regulation of their enterprises," said Massie Ritsch of the Center.

Until recent months, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac largely succeeded in that effort - functioning with relatively little oversight as they aggressively grew their portfolio of mortgages to try to increase earnings.

Campaign contributions bought influence as well, including donations to the presidential candidates.

Sen. Barack Obama is the No. 3 recipient of Fannie and Freddie campaign dollars, having collected $123,000 from the companies since he first ran for the Senate in 2004, according to the Federal Election Commission and the Center for Responsive Politics.

The former chief executive of Fannie Mae, James Johnson, was the original head of Obama's vice presidential search team. Johnson resigned from Obama's campaign amid controversy over discounted home loans he had received.

Sen. John McCain has received $19,000 from the two companies in the past ten years."
________

That's $40,000 a year for Obama and $1900 a year for McCain- Wow, Obama what do you owe them in return?

Posted by: Scott | September 17, 2008 11:27 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 17, 2008 8:56 PM

Someone is posing as AsperGirl, the writing is too direct and is based on the real world. AsperGirl is being trained on how to build up McCain's economic credentials. It is taking so long because there is so little to work with. First they have to forge the supporting documents.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 10:47 PM | Report abuse

This time around Phil Gramm is a gift from God for Obama and the Democrats. This guy was probably in line to takeover from Paulson at Treasury if McCain was to win. Phil Gramm is the true voice of modern day Republican dogma (until 2 days ago). That is that govt. oversight is just awful and it interferes with the invisible hand. Gee where are all the cons today on that philosophy?

Now they are trying to position themselves as good stewards of our economy. As reformers! That's rich but it won't wash guys.

Posted by: CynthiaD1 | September 17, 2008 10:41 PM | Report abuse

If McCain loses this election it is because he chose Phill Gramm because he shared his views on deregulation but Phil Gramm had no understanding of this economy. He did not understand the rot that laid within his industry. He was too involved in politics and too uninformed in the area of his doctoral thesis. The man sounded ignorant of economics when he was a Senator and I was astonished when I was told that his doctorate is in economics. The rest of the McCain advisors are no better since they could not explain to McCain what was happening in this crisis. And worse they have no plan. The great deregulator blusters about regulation but has no understanding of the subject

McCain is like a deer frozen by headlights when economics is the subject. Misinformation and dissembling will not work on the subject of the economy and that is inescapable.

Posted by: Ronnn | September 17, 2008 10:40 PM | Report abuse

Ugghh, don't listen to "You have to be from MI to understand"! I doubt this person has been in Michigan for decades, and is probably from Toledo. You can't blame Michigan's downturn on Jenny G and you know it. Michigan's economy has been doing poorly since the late 1980s. Let's admit it the state is completely dependent on the Auto industry, and the fact that Engler and Blanchard gave the Auto orgs free reins to do whatever they want, and not help shape policy to improve the auto industry, has been much worse than anything that Jenny G has done. I am not saying Granholm has been great for Michigan, but at least she has tried to diversify the economy somewhat, and work with Michigan's expertise in mechanical expertise (those laid off auto workers do know something about electronics and machinery). Michigan needs to be brought into the 21st century, and it will take awhile since the auto industry still thinks its 1958. So go back to Ohio State, or maybe actually go to Michigan and check things out...

Posted by: Don't hate on Jenny G | September 17, 2008 9:54 PM | Report abuse

Fight fascism, vote Obama.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 9:53 PM | Report abuse

More lies from McCain about Obama's plans for taxes.

More of the same. Its about a Gramm too much and its going to sink his ship.

I am sorry but the backs of the blue collar workers, while it may be the back bone of the American economy, it cannot handle the train wreck that is the economic and fiscal mismanagement of the Bush and Cheney years and then still carry the can for McCain.

Blue collar workers are too smart to vote against there own interest this time.

Posted by: Paul Stewart | September 17, 2008 9:18 PM | Report abuse

How about McCain advisor Donald Luskin's article in Sunday's Washington Post? The one where he basically repeated Phil Gramm's argument that we are all a bunch of whiners? That sure was a masterpiece of timing -- right before the roof blew off.

Hey, I know this is off-topic, but has anyone else noticed how the Post has quietly sold its loyal readers down the river with their latest web site redesign? User comments have been SEVERELY restricted -- the majority of articles no longer allow any comments whatsoever. Now, writers like Michelle Singletary can say any stupid thing they want to, without fear of accountability from the readership. The web site has also removed the single-page and print views, so there's no longer any easy way to print out articles of interest.

I used to respect the Washington Post for their forward-looking approach to reader participation -- they were the only ones who seemed to get it. Sadly, the dinosaurs seem to have prevailed, and the Washington Post is moving back towards the closed-box model. They don't realize how easily their online readership can move elsewhere.

I encourage all readers of the Post to complain to the ombudsman and anyone else they can find about this betrayal of the online community.

Posted by: Steve | September 17, 2008 9:14 PM | Report abuse

If McCain loses this election, it will have been due to his inability to develop a healthy distance from Gramm and prepare to fight on the economy front with a constructive set of positions.

Gramm's a sickening old fool who has a lot to do with the problems we face today. McCain should have separated himself from Gramm long ago.

If I had known McCain was so stupid as to be a Gramm-hugger and a Gramm clone in his economic ideas, I'd never have donated to him. That's a level of stupidity and cluelessness about our economy that is a little hard to believe.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 17, 2008 8:56 PM | Report abuse

This is to complicated of an issue for mere pundits and journalists. The Democratic Governor Jennifer Granholm has nearly bankrupted the state and created such a negative environment for business, that they are all leaving. What is great, is she is prepping Biden for the debate. Give me a break. No wonder the meter at bop-o-rama.com is showing Obama down 2 to one.

Posted by: You have to be from MI to understand! | September 17, 2008 8:55 PM | Report abuse

This could be a turning point in the race. Voters are finally paying attention to a real issue and McCain seems paralyzed, unable to coherently handle it. Not that Obama is doing great, but the perception is that at least he cares about things. McCain is just spouting off cheap talking points.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: matt | September 17, 2008 8:55 PM | Report abuse

Gramm had rejoined the campaign as an unofficial adviser, Done without publicity weeks ago.

I hope the people of Michigan realize that McCain is lying since 75% of wage earners will do better under the Obama plan than McCain's and that only 5% will actually have a rate hike.

Did Mr McCain tell the people that under his health care policy that if you have employer based health insurance your income tax will be increased. I think not.

Mr Gramm must have a serious case of laryngitis since there was a public announcement this past Monday that this is not a mental recession.

Posted by: Ronnn | September 17, 2008 8:52 PM | Report abuse

We held a great celebration at my Church this evening with the collapse of the market. We rejoyce in the sacrifice that is to come with the failure of the American system. We have taken our monies out of the banks and retirement funds. Let the folly begin. There will be much blood and suffering. Lord have mercy and hear our prayers.

McCain/Palin 08

Posted by: Johna The Christian Nihilist | September 17, 2008 8:52 PM | Report abuse

In her acceptance speech, Sarah Palin approvingly quoted Westbrook Pegler, who among other things was a racist, an anti-semite and a fascist who advocated killing Robert F. Kennedy.

In Spanish, there is a phrase, "To s/he who understands, few words are needed."

Palin's literary choice speaks volumes about why her ignorance does not portend bliss for the American people and their ideals.

In this time of economic turndown, a moment when the search for scapegoats may be just around the corner, it might be wise to remember the words of author Sinclair Lewis, which hopefully will not turn out to be prophetic:

“When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross.”

Posted by: Martin Edwin Andersen | September 17, 2008 8:28 PM | Report abuse

In her acceptance speech, Sarah Palin approvingly quoted Westbrook Pegler, who among other things was a racist, an anti-semite and a fascist who advocated killing Robert F. Kennedy.

In Spanish, there is a phrase, "To s/he who understands, few words are needed."

Palin's literary choice speaks volumes about why her ignorance does not portend bliss for the American people and their ideals.

In this time of economic turndown, a moment when the search for scapegoats may be just around the corner, it might be wise to remember the words of author Sinclair Lewis, which hopefully will not turn out to be prophetic:

“When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross.”

Posted by: Martin Edwin Andersen | September 17, 2008 8:27 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company