Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Obama Looks to Regain Momentum


A young supporter of Barack Obama holds up his notebook as Obama speaks in Golden, Colo., Sept. 16, 2008. (Reuters/Rick Wilking)

By Dan Balz
This week's financial shocks have given Barack Obama an unexpected opportunity to regain some of the momentum that was lost in the aftermath of John McCain's convention and the excitement over Sarah Palin. How will he respond?

His immediate reaction to the financial trauma that swept Wall Street and Main Street on Monday was to mock McCain for suggesting that the economic fundamentals are sound. "What economy is he talking about?" the Illinois Democrat exclaimed in Colorado.

Obama believes one strategy is to paint McCain as out of touch with the lives of middle-class families. Polls show the public already believes Obama is the more empathetic of the two candidates and more attuned to their everyday problems, and anything McCain says that reinforces the impression that he is out of touch will draw a sharp response from Democrats.

It was the same last week when Obama seized on a comment McCain made during a forum at Columbia University, even though Obama had said almost the same thing in the past. Talking about the practical experience of small-town mayors like his running mate, McCain acknowledged that it was easy to fall out of touch as a member of the Senate.

The second line of attack is just as obvious. That is to portray McCain as a disciple of the conservative, antiregulation economic philosophy of President Bush and the Republican Party. At a time when there is widespread agreement that the government failed to check the worst impulses of investment bankers and real estate companies, why not attack McCain for embracing a laissez-faire approach to economic policy?

In Colorado Tuesday morning, Obama said again he does not blame McCain for the state of the economy, but that he does blame "the economic philosophy Senator McCain subscribes to." The latest hit to the financial industry, he said, represents "a final verdict on an economic philosophy that has failed."

In his speech, he accused McCain of supporting ideological policies that made the crisis worse and then said his rival had scrambled to stay abreast of the unraveling of the financial industry. "My opponent is running for four more years of policies that will throw the economy further out of balance," he said.

As Obama attacks, McCain dodges. In Florida Tuesday morning, he escalated his populist attack against "reckless conduct, corruption, and unbridled greed" that he said brought Wall Street to this crisis, playing the maverick card that has proven effective since his convention.

As president, McCain vowed, he would clean up the financial industry and penalize corporate executives who pile up losses and escape the wreckage on golden parachutes. "I promise you that on my watch, we are never going to let these kinds of abuses go uncorrected or unpunished," he said.

McCain also called for a national commission, along the lines of the 9/11 commission, to study what went wrong on Wall Street and recommend a new regulatory structure "so this never, ever happens again," as he put it on MSNBC, adding, "And as president, I guarantee you, it will never happen again."

To that, Obama offered a scornful response. "John McCain cannot be trusted to reestablish proper oversight of our financial markets for one simple reason: he has shown time and again that he does not believe in it," he said.

This week's focus is on the financial industry, but that is not where the overall economic debate will stay. If Obama is to take full advantage of this moment, he will need to stitch the current crisis on Wall Street to a large narrative of putting the U.S. economy into a position that gives people confidence in their own futures -- and do so in a way that puts McCain at an even greater disadvantage.

Obama may have trouble competing with McCain on the question of who is the bigger maverick. McCain has shrewdly redefined the debate over change. Obama now must make the change argument in a way that plays most to the strengths and attributes he might bring to the presidency.

He can try to out-populist the newly populist McCain, although that is not his natural style. He can simply stay on the attack, and that could pay dividends. But it's likely he will need more.

Former Virginia governor Mark Warner, in his Democratic convention keynote speech that otherwise drew tepid reviews, offered one model. He declared that America is in a race to the future with the rest of the world and that success depends on assuring that the economy is prepared for the competition -- a future versus past argument that Obama has talked about but also never pushed consistently.

The mystery of why Obama has not gained a greater advantage on the economy remains. I asked a veteran Democrat about this on Monday. "It baffles me," he said. The economic issue long has been the Democrats' bread and butter. "They have always been at their best whenever they've been given these issues," he said. His advice to Obama was to "go directly at it."

That's the opportunity this crisis has presented.

By Web Politics Editor  |  September 16, 2008; 2:30 PM ET
Categories:  B_Blog , Barack Obama , Dan Balz's Take , John McCain  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Fiorina: Palin Lacks Experience to Run a Company
Next: Obama Ridicules McCain's Economic Response

Comments

There's no mystery.

Obama is black. Most Americans simply will not vote for a black man. And they will think of every excuse in the book to rationalize their racism. Even if he is one of the smartest people on the planet.

At the same time, McCain and Palin are two of the dumbest politicians to ever run for public office. He finished close to the bottom of his class in the US Naval Academy. And she attended five bottom tier colleges before she could even get a degree.

Yeah I really want two people of below average intelligence to run this country.

Once upon a time, the Republican Party valued intelligence in their candidates. Then came George W. Bush. Now the GOP puts up these two dumbasses just to hold onto power. Incredible.

There is a word for people who vote against their own self-interest. They are called morons.

Posted by: CB | September 17, 2008 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Democrats for John McCain and Sarah Palin in 2008

Posted by: Helen | September 17, 2008 11:16 AM | Report abuse

OBAMA WILL RISK AMERICANS FOR POLITICAL ADVANTAGE! do not vote Obama, Please Google Obama LOGAN ACT!

One of CNN's leading Obama sychophants, Candy Crowley, let the cat out of the Obama bag, when she told viewers that the Obama campaign had wanted horrific Wall Street headlines to help their campaign. Crowley, and fellow Obama sychophant David Gergen, were extolling the virtues of bad economic news for the Obama campaign.

Of course, no one would expect CNN to actually deal with the issue of who or what party is responsible for the economy. No, their template is the economy is horrible, we are going to blame Bush and McCain and Obama will benefit.

The Drudge Report had this story on its site this morning. By this evening however, it had been pulled. Drudge must have realized how bad this would look for the Obama campaign.

It's beyond audacious that we have one candidate for President who is full of hope. Hope that the economy is so bad, that he can win an election because of it. The conservative internet has its work cut out for it for the next 53 days.

Posted by: OBAMA WILL RISK AMERICANS | September 17, 2008 7:09 AM | Report abuse

Obama’s campaign is not a train wreck; it’s Chernobyl.
Obama campaign seems to have hit the wall. Also has ramped up the dirty politics-as-usual theme that has been playing ever since the announcement of Sarah Palin as McCain’s Vice Presidential selection, sending a wild horde of Obamabots to Alaska in search of dirty underwear and soiled linens. Campaign also beset with some troubling scandals and stormy political foreboding. We’re not talking about Rezko and Ayers stuff which have been known since the primaries and continue to expand. We’re talking about a vast surge in scrutiny surrounding Obama’s beloved ACORN, about alienating half the voting populace in America by having surrogates question whether a mother should work. More, we’re talking about Obama’s potential violations of the Logan Act by tampering with U.S. negotiations with Iraq in order to impact the elections. The New York Post reported Barack Obama privately tried to persuade Iraqi political leaders to stall an agreement on scaling back American troops in Iraq while publicly campaigning for a speedy withdrawal, Obama’s request for a delay was a major theme of his talks with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said in an interview with the Post. Obama said that Congress should be involved in negotiations on the status of American troops, excluding the Bush administration in its “state of weakness and political confusion,” according to the report. Obama also reportedly tried to persuade the U.S. commanders, including Gen. David Petraeus, to offer a “realistic withdrawal date.” They declined, the Post said. As mentioned early this morning on American Sentinel, allegations that he attempted to tamper with negotiations in Iraq in order to benefit his campaign could, lead to actual prosecution. Obama’s selection of Biden over Clinton, followed quickly by McCain’s selection of Palin, solidified Obama’s reputation as someone who was immovable, selfish and lacking in judgement. Slamming Palin on her experience only wizened up the public about Obama’s own lack of credentials. In fact, polls now show that people feel both Obama and Palin are about equally qualified, despite a 24 hour Palin-is-an-idiot watch being conducted on nearly every major network. Combining poor judgment and an overwhelming ego with scant experience is not a way to carry your party to victory. And don’t forget the tasteless sexism and the community organizer’s organization being targeted for investigation all around the country for committing voter fraud. Obama’s campaign is not a train wreck; it’s Chernobyl.

Posted by: Obama’s campaign train wreck | September 17, 2008 7:07 AM | Report abuse

Obama has lied about his entire life, he's so used to lying he actually believes his own lies. Obama can not tell fact from fiction.

Read about Obama's 122 documented [and counting] lies , and more at:

http://obamawtf.blogspot.com/2008/05/documented-lie-50-obama-claimed-he-had.html


122 Obama claims Big Oil is ignoring 68 million acres of oil fields they could be drilling; most fields are being worked
121 Obama claims never questions his opponent's patriotism; asks of McCain "WHICH country first?": ABC says he's questioning McCain's patriotism
120 Obama claims personal savings rates are lowest since the Great Depression; currently higher than under President Clinton
119 Obama claims on this video that he doesn't switch positions; list of 31 flip flops show he's lying
118 In the Primaries Obama puffed his resume claiming he was a "Professor"; State Senate bio shows he was not ; he now agrees
117 When Obama ran for US Senate his web site claimed "5 years as a community organizer"; he admits it was only 3 years
116 Obama's attack ad in Michigan claims McCain doesn't support loan guarantees for auto-industry. McCain DOES support them
115 Obama says "if we're STILL in recession when he takes office...etc"; the economy is NOT in recession
114 Obama claims he signed up for Selective Service when he graduated from High School; records show he did NOT until he'd been at college 1 year
113 Attacking Palin, Obama has the audacity to claim,"Words mean something; you can't just make things up "; BHO makes stuff up
112 Biden claims McCain will increase taxes for workers & Obama will only increase taxes on those making $435k: he's lying
111 Biden claims Obama drew the Nation's attention to problems at Walter Reed Army Hospital; it was two WaPo reporters that reported the issues to the Nation
110 to make Obama seems more American/less exotic, Biden tells Scranton crowd Obama grew up in Kansas; BHO grew up in Hawaii and Indonesia
109 Obama lies yet again to disparage Gov. Palin; ignores her executive experience as Governor of Alaska
108 Obama says the US economy has failed under Bush; World Bank stats proves Obama's been lying; US a world leader in growth, employment, incomes
107 Obama claims if you are born into poverty in America you are on your own: there are many government programs
106 Obama claims he's bi-partisan: voting records prove Obama is #11 most partisan
105 Claimed Hillary would be on anyone's short-list; Hillary wasn't on Obama's short-list
104 Obama claims abortion rates have not gone down under the Bush Administration; stats show they have gone down
103 Obama dismissed Bomber Bill Ayers as "some guy who lives in the neighborhood";they had a close working relationship
102 Obama claims there's no charge to attend his acceptance speech: CBS 4 in Denver proves he's lying; some tickets cost $1000
101 Obama used being a first-time-buyer to justify consulting with Rezko before he bought his house; BHO had already purchased a residence
100 Obama lies about his support for infanticide; campaign concedes in 03 he opposed a bill stopping the killing of kids born alive after abortions
99 Obama overstates Oil Industry's contributions to McCain; ignores cash the Oil industry gave BHO; Newsweek debunks
98 To belittle America,Obama exaggerated the growth in Debt under the current Administration; debunked by WaPo
97 Obama claims President George W Bush had not left the country before he became President; WaPo confirms he's lying
96 To promote "green", Obama claimed he drove a vehicle that uses ethanol; GM confirmed the model was NOT ethanol-ready
95 Obama claims he's taking his family for a week's rest in Hawaii with no campaigning; schedules a rally for first day
94: Obama claims "properly inflating tires" will save as much energy as we could drill offshore; analysis shows not even close
93 Obama denies accusing McCain of using race against him; ABC, NYT confirm Obama did accuse McCain of making racial attacks
92 Obama claims he's not being political when he's flip-flopping; timing & direction of major flip-flops show he's lying
91: Obama INVENTS a wall between Christians and Jews; deceptively omits the major religious wall is caused by a "fatwah" to kill American Christians and Jews
90 Obama claims he made a substantive call for Germany to help in Iraq; Berlin speech transcript proves he's lying
89: Obama admits he underestimated the decline in violence from the Surge; falsely claims McCain made same mistake
88 Obama turned a disappointing crowd of 20,000 into media reports of 200,000
87 Obama lied about his father's religious upbringing! half-brother confirms Obama's father was "RAISED Muslim"
86 Obama claimed we only made one fundraising trip to Florida during the Primary; Florida papers proved he lied
85 Claims reducing obesity to 80's levels would save Medicaid ONE TRILLION DOLLARS; not even close
84 To make Iraq/Afghan Wars look bad, Obama claimed demands on Nat Guard personnel hurt flood relief; Guards prove lying
83 Claimed due to overseas commitments, too few helecopters were available to help with Midwest flood relief; now concedes not true
82 Starting in Iowa, Obama claimed Clinton's healthcare plan would "punish families that couldn't afford healthcare"; NYT calls BS
81 Obama claims McCain's tax plan will do nothing to help the middle-class: The Tax Policy Center proves he's lying
80 claims the use of an Email with a big red DONATE button is NOT a fundraising solicitation
79 Obama claims his trip to Europe was non-political: uses video of Berlin speech to raise money within hours
78 Tells NBC that during the debate on the Surge he said the Surge would work in Baghdad; video proves during the debate he said the opposite
77 Obama's "Changing World" ad claims he'll fast-track alternatives to oil to stop us buying from hostile nations; "fast track" is totally misleading
76 Obama tells Israeli media that he's a member of the Senate Banking Committee; CNN confirms he's delusional
75 Obama claims Lou Dobbs caused hate crimes against Latinos to double; the FBI and CNN confirm Obama is lying
74 Obama claims the military brass think like he does; top US commanders say his plan for Iraq is unworkable
73: Obama promised to filibust FISA; later Obama voted for FISA and now denies changing his position
72 Obama belittles Americans claiming we can't speak European languages; he's talking merde; mierda; Scheiße
71 Obama denied he accused President Bush of starting the War for political reasons; Russert transcript proves Obama made that false claim
70 Obama claims there has been substantial job losses from NAFTA; Independent studies show its at least" job neutral"
69 Claimed in Feb 08 he got 90% of funds from donors giving $25, $50; fed filings show he got only about a third from donors below $200
68 Obama rewrites history about what specifically he had said during his October 2002 anti-war speech
67 Obama claimed in 04 that he had never supported bringing troops out of Iraq; rare video of 03 Teamsters rally shows he's lying
66 Obama lied about the softness of the Stock Market to support his false claim the War was being used to distract the public
65 To justify move to private funds, Obama claims McCain's campaign is" fuelled" by PACs and Lobbyists; its less than 2% of McCain's money
64 Obama's "Dignity" ad claims he "worked his way" thru college and law school; campaign admits only two summer jobs
63 Obama's "Dignity" ad gives him credit for reducing Welfare rolls by 80%: he's deceptive as he was opposed to Fed Welfare Reform in '96
62 In Obama's The Country I love ad, he takes credit for passing a healthcare bill he did NOT vote for
61 Claims he first ran in Chicago as an unendorsed candidate; his '96 election questionnaire proves he had several
60 Obama claims he wants a vigorous and open debate on the issues: then goes out of his way to avoid it
59 Obama omits key details about a false rumor re video of Michelle's "whitey" rant to justify breaking his public funding promise
58 Obama tries to deceive about why he voted "present" more than 100 times in the Illinois Senate; Chicago paper reveals the truth
57 Trying to claim patriotism Obama says his grandad signed up the day after Pearl Harbor; army records disagree
56 Claims race and party not important to how people vote as they put America first; 93% block vote disproves
55 On June 5, Obama stated that Israel must remain undivided; June 6 on CNN he reversed his position, but denied he had done so
54 To further his own agenda, Obama grossly overstates the number of potential African-American votes in MS, GA, SC
53 Promise of $2500 reduction in Healthcare premiums needs billions in Admin cost savings by 2012: not possible
52 Obama omits to mention his 3 week trip to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan until it slips out trying to out-do Clinton
51 Obama claims McCain wants to wage a lengthy war in Iraq: Video proves Obama's lying
50 Obama claimed he never prayed in a mosque; his campaign had to retract that statement
49 Obama dishonestly used endorsements in ads to pump up his healthcare plan
48 Claims he never discussed politics with Pastor; rebutted by photo of Obama with team of lobbyists led by Wright
47 Obama, an expert at parsing words, claimed he wasn't familiar with the word "Clintonian"; then changed his story
46 Despite reeking of cigarettes, Obama denied smoking to ABC; now admits smoking on MSNBC
45 Obama said he'd meet unconditionally with Leader of Iran: now claims he "didn't have Ahmadinejad in mind"
44 Obama claims he is using public financing to avoid special interests: WSJ nails his switcheroo
43 Obama's rhetoric claims more young black men in jail than college: BoJ Stats disprove
42 Claims he never said he was a proponent of single-payer universal healthcare; Video proves he did
41 Obama claims remarks to industrialists were greeted with silence, shows he can deliver tough message: video of ovation
40 Obamas claim you dont rip opponents & leave on roadside:he did to Alice Palmer
39 Obama denies saying Indiana could be tie-breaker: he did
38 Obama omits that Pastor Wright led divestiture campaign from Israel
37 Obama claims Church not controversial; he knew it was controversial since 86
36 Lied about intention of taking US out of NAFTA
35 Obamas claim poverty growing up: both distort reality
34 Obama denies meeting Saddam's Auchi; sworn Fed. witness places Obama at undisclosed party for Auchi at Rezkos
33 Obama lies about not attacking Clinton over her Bosnia lies
32 Obama claims he passed ethics reform; ABC News shows he lied
31 Obama says he's consistently opposed NAFTA; in October 2007 he supported expansion to Peru
30 Obama claims he's above dirty political tricks; Clinton proves he lies
29 Obama claims his "bitter" remarks were mangled; then repeats attacks on guns religion and angry people
28 Obama claims never said he wouldn't wear US flag-pin; video shows he did
27 Obama says he did no favors for Rezko;untrue; he lobbied for him
26 Changes story repeatedly re Rezko's help in buying mansion
25 Obama claims he never supported a ban on handguns; he has twice
24 Obama claims stays at UCC as Pastor acknowledged comments were inappropriate; Wright never made this statement
23 Campaign is beholden to "only the people" as unlike McCain/Clinton he does not take lobbyist /PAC money; LIES!
22 Claims campaign never called Canada to say Obama not truthful re wanting leave NAFTA; smoking gun memo proves lied
21 Mrs Obama admits she's never been proud of America; Video disproves Sen. Obama's later claim she was misquoted
20 Claimed would not run for President, as he would not be qualified by 2008: confirmed 3 times to Tim Russert in one 2006 interview
19 Claims famous in Il. for not letting lobbyists even buy him lunch; took from teachers, trial lawyers, hospital admins
18 Claims his parents met at Selma civil rights march; Washington Post noted it occurred 4 yrs after Obama's birth
17 BO claims courageously opposed war in 2002 during US Senate campaign; He did not announce his senate bid until 2003
16 Claims he passes tough Nuclear Law; NYT uncovers he took Nuclear Industry pay-off and watered down the bill
15 Claimed he didn't know Rezko was corrupt when did a real estate deal with him; Chicago papers prove he lied
14 Claims does not accept money from Big Oil: Real Clear Politics proves he lied
13 Denies using his Hopefund PAC to influence endorsers; but the Washington Post reviewed the record and disagreed
12 Claims his State Chair is not a drug company lobbyist; Time magazine cries @#$%&
11 Lies about how much he received in campaign funds from Rezko; forced to significantly increase the amount twice
10 Claims he did not fill out the 1996 candidate questionaire; Politico proves he lied
9 Took credit for achievement of others in Chicago; resume puffing exposed by LA Times
8 Claims he kept no State Senate records; now he changes his story
7 Denies doubling wife's salary was due to becoming US Senator; omits within months he earmarked $1 million for hospital
6 Denied meeting Saddam bagman Auchi; now admits he was at his dinner but does not remember talking to him
5 Denies using his church for politics: IRS disagree
4 Claims he was unaware of Pastor Wrights 911 comments: NYT proves he lied
3 Claims his father was a goat-herd; actually he was a man of privilige
2 Claims not an active muslim as child; Indonesian paper proves he lied
1 Claims father linked to Kennedys; Washington Post proves he lied

A vote for Obama is a vote for Pelosi and Reid, sounds like Change to me.

Posted by: occam2 | September 17, 2008 3:24 AM | Report abuse

Targeting of U.S. Citizens by Gov't Agencies:

A Root Cause of Wall Street Financial Crisis?

Could government "targeting" of American citizens outside the bounds of the judicial system be one of the root causes of the Wall Street financial meltdown that threatens to devastate the global economy?

Victims of so-called "organized gang stalking" claim that federal and local government agencies involved in intelligence, law enforcement, and revenue collection have established a network of secret programs aimed at destroying the financial well-being of "targeted" individuals -- who are denied due process of law as their financial resources are systematically expropriated.

These programs allegedly involve the interception of mail; surveillance, interception and alteration of telecommunications, including telephone and internet communications; fabrication of bank, credit card, mortgage and billing statements; surreptitious manipulation of personal and business bank and mortgage accounts.

Victims theorize that these "programs of personal destruction" are a derivative of past controversial government programs such as Cointelpro and Total Information Awareness. They maintain that the enactment of sweeping laws such as the USA Patriot Act, passed by Congress in the wake of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, have emboldened those who would use the powers of the state to restrict civil liberties as a tool of social control.

In effect, victims say, a secret parallel system of transaction processing has been established for persons targeted by government agencies. Victims allege that the goal is to destroy their capacity to earn a living and to support themselves and their families. They maintain that these "mechanics of personal destruction" closely resemble the tactics employed by pre-war Nazi Germany in its campaign against the Jews and other targeted groups, such as those deemed to be political "dissenters."

Victims charge that these programs also are designed to degrade their physical health, with health care professionals sometimes pressured to cooperate. Citizen vigilantes affiliated with government-funded community policing and "watch" groups are employed to harass and intimidate those targeted by these government programs, victims charge. These civilian vigilantes are believed to be equipped with high-tech instruments such as radiation-emitting"directed energy" weapons capable of causing serious adverse health effects -- what some describe as a "slow genocide."

Officials in the private sector are believed to have knowledge of some of these programs, since their cooperation is key to the functioning of the system. Victims charge that the government is using national security and the "war on terror" as a pretext to secure the cooperation of corporations and businesses. But they say it's also possible that the civilian overseers of these agencies, as well as civilian operatives, have been kept in the dark about the most nefarious aspects of these programs.

It's feared that the government takeover of more than half of the nation's mortgage market, and government bailouts and supervision of failed and financially troubled investment houses and insurers such as Bear Stearns, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Bros. and AIG could help effectuate these programs.

Those who say they have been victimized by these programs are calling upon Congress to immediately convene hearings on unconstitutional, extra-legal abuses of power carried out under the direction of government agencies -- what they see as an unraveling of the American constitutional democracy and a descent into a corporate-fascist police state.


FOR MORE ON STATE-SUPPORTED DOMESTIC TERRORISM:

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/government-agencies-support-domestic-torture-and-gang-stalking-says-noted-nowpublic-com-columnist

Posted by: scrivener | September 17, 2008 3:13 AM | Report abuse

I've been a liberal my entire life, I never thought I'd see the day. Honestly guys, give it up, you aren't conservatives at all, you have a faith based political system. It isn't WHAT you believe, it's THAT you believe. Do you realize your economic policy is chapter and verse out of Maos little red book?
Honestly, if you'd just stop killing brown people, I'd probably join the Republican Party.

Posted by: Dijetlo | September 17, 2008 12:44 AM | Report abuse

>>Instead of refuting Obama's shady associates (which you can't do),

Your asking him to prove a negative, it's not possible. We don't use that standard to judge the actions of people anyway, if you have an accusation, provide the proof, then it becomes a matter of disproving what you say or if the accused fails to do that your accusations are considered true and he is considered guilty.
That's fair.
But please, do not take this as an invitation to bore everyone with your "proof", we're not the ones you have to convince.
To make this easy for you, let's just suggest that you give your "proof" to one of your Republican Senators. Sessions from Ala might be a good pick, I've met him and he seems like a genuinely nice guy. Take it to him and get him to level your accusation at Obama before the ethics committee, I don't require you get them to do anything about it, just get a Republican Senator to sign off on your theory that Obama is a corrupt, anti-american, hate church attending, sleeper cell Jihadi and I'll give it some consideration.
Otherwise, you're like the people who claim that McCain is a really a flesh eating Zombie and Palin is an empty headed M1LF.
Zombie/M1LF 08!!!!!

Posted by: dijetlo | September 17, 2008 12:34 AM | Report abuse

.

Anonymous:
"just remember not to whine, just squeal like a pig!"

Now this is *really* an example of the intellect of Obama supporters.

.

Posted by: Billw | September 17, 2008 12:11 AM | Report abuse

"Fed announces deal to take over ailing AIG"
"$85 billion loan would give central bank 80 percent stake in insurance giant"

Wow, we now own the biggest insurance company in the United States as well as the two biggest mortgage banks, and we are holding billions of dollars in paper on a third...The government is going to own the investment industry pretty soon.
That's socialism, Baby!!!
Way to go Republicans,when are you getting started on the health care industry?
Seriously, what's up with you guys? I thought you were rough, tough he-men who wet their beds at the thought of a terrorist but believed in "survival of the fittest/devil take the hindmost" when it came to money? When did you guys turn into Uncle Joe Stalin? Right about the time you became the hindmost, apparently.
What tickles me is, I thought we didn't have the money to pay our Social Security obligations? We do have the money to pay for two wars and bail the investor class out of their greed driven folly though, so doesn't that mean it's more a matter of priorities than wealth? To the voting American which is more important, enforcing our will in third world nations on the other side of the world and insuring the investments of the wealthy or being able to retire a couple of years before you drop dead?
If there is a silver lining to this dark cloud, it's that I guess now that we own them, we're going to have to regulate them, huh?

Posted by: dijetlo | September 17, 2008 12:08 AM | Report abuse

.


Westerner:
"A first grader has more sense than this guy."

More ad hominem. Again, typical of Obama supporters. A pathetic bunch of name-callers, but what else can be expected?


.

Posted by: Billw | September 17, 2008 12:08 AM | Report abuse

.

TheWind:
"One-man nation of whiners."

Your name says it all.


.

Posted by: Billw | September 17, 2008 12:06 AM | Report abuse

.

Anonymous:
"You sound like another racist republican ignorant knuckle-dragger."

This is typical of Obama supporters. Instead of refuting Obama's shady associates (which you can't do), you resort to name-calling. Perhaps you should go with Obama to Kenya and live with his relatives. Birds of a feather flock together, you know.
PS: Take Wright with you.

.


Posted by: Billw | September 17, 2008 12:03 AM | Report abuse

If I recall correctly, it was a REPUBLICAN LED Congress making all the rules during Clinton's last term.

He must have given them some grief or we would never have heard about Monica.

THIS IS A REPUBLICAN MESS.

Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999:
Tore down the "Wall of China" separating banking institution offering
different services(eg, investment banks vs commercial banks) created
by the Glass-Steagall Act that was enacted in in 1933 in the wake of
the crash in 1929 to prevent banks from over-investing in loans and
mortgages with people's savings.

COMPASSIONATE CONSERVATIVES!

Websters needs to add a new definition for this term.

LIARS
LIARS
LIARS

Posted by: there is no anonymous anymore | September 16, 2008 11:46 PM | Report abuse

My interest was peaked when I peeked at the pages of foreclosed properties
in my state and saw that Mortgage Electronic Registration Service (MERS) was the
Trustee of many of them.

I wondered "Who is Mers"?

Why were they the Trustee on so many foreclosed properties:
I looked them up on the internet.

Then I wondered,

Why did MERS have Foreclosure instructions issued with Each State in 1999?

www.mersinc.org/foreclosures/index.aspx

You can do your own research on the website above.

Then I remembered the :

Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999:
Tore down the "Wall of China" separating banking institution offering
different services(eg, investment banks vs commercial banks) created
by the Glass-Steagall Act that was enacted in in 1933 in the wake of
the crash in 1929 to prevent banks from over-investing in loans and
mortgages with people's savings.

Lastly, I have a hard time believing our present problems happened willy nilly.

But, I don't know anything.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 11:42 PM | Report abuse

McCain simply has no ideas for the economy.

Posted by: Jon B | September 16, 2008 11:40 PM | Report abuse

Let me be more frank. How would you know VP Palin at all since she is really not being allowed to debate on her own?

Posted by: justada55+ | September 16, 2008 11:26 PM | Report abuse

Just curious and forgive me being nosey. What would happen if by chance Senetor McCain were to pass, on election night or a week before.

Posted by: justada55+ | September 16, 2008 11:23 PM | Report abuse

wunderwood | September 16, 2008 10:37 PM

Well gee, you's bein' a good goood ol 'boy. So I'sa gw-eye-na be goood too.

"Sympathetic" is not logical diction and not a paradigm or an example that supports making "empathetic" the adjectival variant of "empathy." Compare the French: "sympathie" (translation "sympathy") and "sympathique" (translation "sympathetic" but pronounced "sim-pah-TEEK" and not spelled, and surely not pronounced, "sympathetique"or “sim-pah-teh-TEEK”). See that the French does not add an illogical, and excess, syllable to "sympathie" — to make the related adjective.

The better ENGLISH-LANGUAGE comparison (especially in your case) is "psychopath" and "psychopathic." In its adjectival variant, “psychopath” is not psychopathetic" — which, if it were a word, might mean "pathetic psychically.”

Le seigneur de la plus belle langue

Posted by: Loup-bouc | September 16, 2008 11:11 PM | Report abuse

orrg1: Your facts are in error. First of all, the DOW restructured during Bill Clinton's Administration, so your 300% number is bogus. Second, your 75% number is flat wrong: remember Jumpin' Jim Jeffords? The Democrats took control of the Senate less than halfway through Bush's first year in office--which, by the way, was the the last budget year of the Clinton Administration. Even after the 2002 elections when there was a Republican majority in both houses of Congress, the Republicans never had the filibuster-proof 3/5 supermajority that is necessary to get any legislation passed.

Also, the economy began its nosedive in 2000, and reached its nadir in the middle of 2002--just six months into the first budget year that President Bush had any say in. Had 9/11 hadn't happened, the measures Bush originally pushed for in the 2002 budget would have been sufficient to pull the economy out of its slump.

Moreover, the current financial crisis is a legacy of the Clinton Administration, since the financial institutions were deregulated in 1999. Senator John McCain sponsored a bill in 2005 in an attempt to forestall what is currently happening, but the Democrats blocked it. You really should place blame where it belongs, at the feet of the Dimocrats.

Since you seem to like numbers and statistics, here's a few more for you:

In 2006, before the Democrats took control of both houses of Congress,

The Dow was hovering around 14000, unemployment was around 4.5% and Gas was around $2 a gallon.

But American's wanted change, so they voted in a Democratic Congress.

President Bush had been effectively emasculated by the liberal media over the Iraq War to the point that he has been rendered politically impotent, so as a consequence, it would be disingenuous to blame him for anything that has occurred to the economy since the 2006 midterm elections.

Enter Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Now the Dow is hovering around 11000, unemployment is 6.1% and gas is around $4 a gallon.

And Senator Obama is poised to usher in more change, and in case anyone hadn't noticed, Obama, though eloquent, is essentially Pelosi and Reid's lapdog. (I have to admit that a different word originally came to mind, but it has nasty racial overtones and quite frankly, my issues with Obama have nothing to do with race.)

Is Obama's--excuse me--is Reid and Pelosi's "change" the kind of change we need?

Posted by: BrianInOhio | September 16, 2008 11:06 PM | Report abuse

Democratic oversight of the financial industry. That's why Obama has not gained a greater advantage? 1. Fannie Mai and Freddie Mac - leadership Dem's. 2. House Committee on Financial Services-Chairman Barny Frank-Dem. 3. Senate Banking Committee- Chairman Christopher Dodd-dem. Why not tell the truth Obama? Oh thy are working for you now. People this is the information age prove all things for yourself.

Posted by: xthat | September 16, 2008 10:56 PM | Report abuse

Alance: "To borrow from Truman's playbook, Give 'em hell, Sarah and John, and tell the nation that it is the "do nothing" Pelosi Congress that is responsible for our economic and political woes, with Charlie Rangel and Barney Frank leading the way in their great job of congressional oversight of Wall Street."

OH MY. We are blaming the thin majority in congress for the last decade of Republican excesses? Newt Gingrich and his crew took over the congress in 1994, as I recall. It's been just about, what, 20 months since we've had anything close to responsive government in there. The Republicans still filibuster and stonewall. That's how it works, and you must know that. But speaking of Truman, I am sure he would have loved to be quoted here so let me dive in:
=============
"The underlying differences between the Republican and Democratic Parties boils down to a very simple thing. The Republicans believe that the power of the Government should be used, first of all, to help the rich and privileged people of this country. With them property comes first. The Democrats believe that the powers of the Government should be used to give the common man some protection, and a chance to make a decent living. With the Democrats the people come first."

"The Democratic Party is a political organization that has a heart--it cares about the people--it cares about all the people, rich and poor alike. The Republican Party is ruled by a little group of men who have calculating machines where their hearts ought to be."

"Sometimes the Republicans aid their clientele by special favors--like the rich man's tax cut bill which was passed by the 80th Congress over my veto--or like their attempts to give away the Nation's oil resources to all the big oil interests."

"Sometimes the Republicans aid their special friends by doing nothing--by a philosophy of each man for himself and the devil take the hindmost. That's why they've fought such measures as minimum wage laws, social security, and the protection of the right of labor unions to organize. All these things and others like them have been opposed by the Republicans."

DRILL BABY DRILL - helps big oil
MCCAIN TAX CUT - helps the very rich
EVERY MAN/WOMAN FOR HIMSELF/HERSELF - opposing national healthcare

The Republican party is not the right choice this election. It sounds like perhaps they never have been.

Posted by: wunderwood | September 16, 2008 10:53 PM | Report abuse

Simple idea, "It's the economy again, stupid!!"

Posted by: Mary E. | September 16, 2008 10:51 PM | Report abuse

James: Obama? 1 1/2 years ago? If you check the Congressional record McCain was trying to do something about this back in 2005. Obama's letter is essentially a wish list. No precise proposals.
===
James, how about YOU check the congressional record. You are the one making the claim. I can claim that Obama was saying this back in preschool, just check the record for me, OK?

Posted by: wunderwood | September 16, 2008 10:44 PM | Report abuse

George said:

Of Course Mr. Obama, the fact that these standards were abandoned so that lower income people
could own homes is in part what got us into this mess.
---------------------------
No, the standards were abandoned because the investment banks found a way to create a 21st version of the Ponzi scheme. Please explain who forced banks to make these unqualified loans? They simply saw that the more loans they made, the more money they'd make, WHETHER OR NOT THE LOANS COULD BE EVER PAID BACK because they could repackage and sell the risk to suckers, including many pension and other funds (so watchout folks)!
---------------------------
George said:

You're not really being precise here Mr. Obama. Investors absorbed the risk which was once
just the lenders to absorb and so the lenders were no longer doing due diligence-they didn't have to.
-----------------------------
See my previous post. If these questions were addressed seriously, which Obama was asking for, the present crisis would have been avoided. There was no need for him to be more specific. Paulson and Bernanke certainly understood exactly what he was talking about. They chose however to ignore the problem, and so we are where we are now.

Posted by: orrg1 | September 16, 2008 10:44 PM | Report abuse

Loup-bouc this isn't the proper venue for this discussion, but isn't it fair to say that sympathetic and sympathy share the same relationship as empathetic and empathy? I think you would consider sympathic correct and sympathetic incorrect?

You still following me here?

And yeah, pardner, I think this has been amusing too. But danged if I am going drop the folksy chatter for anyone anytime soon. If it's good enough for those plain downhome folks like Sarah and Dubya (Kennebunkport born?) then *they* must be onto something. Capiche?

Oh and P.S. I am not a grammarian. I gave her the day off, so forgive all the bad grammaring. Advthanksance.

Posted by: wunderwood | September 16, 2008 10:37 PM | Report abuse

House is fundamentally a shelter not investment.

Investors and investment firms overextended themselves only have themselves to blame.

The fundamental is sound, very sound.

Posted by: pete | September 16, 2008 10:35 PM | Report abuse

Obama? 1 1/2 years ago?

If you check the Congressional record McCain was trying to do something about this back in 2005.

Obama's letter is essentially a wish list.
No precise proposals.

Posted by: James | September 16, 2008 10:35 PM | Report abuse

New Rule: the next person that brings up the stupid 57 state meme is a doofus

http://www.obamafactcheck.com/facts/10/339976.shtml

Posted by: wunderwood | September 16, 2008 10:26 PM | Report abuse

Let's analyze a couple of Obama's main recommendations in the letter I reprinted.

1-1/2 years ago:

He said that there should be a discussion of "what standards investors should require of lenders, particularly with regard to verifcation of income and assets...

This is at the heart of the present crisis. The granting of loans to people who were not qualified for them contributed to the bubble in housing prices that created trillions of dollars in phantom worth that is now unwinding, causing collapses of Wall Street giants, and requiring massive bailouts that are going to weigh down taxpayers for years.

He talked of the need to "ensure adequate liquidity across all mortgage markets without exacerbating consumer and housing market vulnerability"

This is a balancing act, where helping out failing mortgage lenders creates moral hazard and can lead to a continuation of the practices that caused the problem in the first place, while not helping can cause a seizure of lending markets altogether.

One and a half years ago, McCain, who is now screaming "regulate" and "reform" was saying everything is peachy keen, and his buddy Bush's policies were great for the economy. Obama was actually trying to do something. If he had been President, we wouldn't be here now.

Posted by: orrg1 | September 16, 2008 10:26 PM | Report abuse

what do you think: The Complete Book of the Collected Knowledge of Sarah Palin or The Compendium of Knowledge of Barack Obama. sarahgiftbook.com obamagiftbook.com

Posted by: susan williams | September 16, 2008 10:25 PM | Report abuse

Tell me please why i would want someone in the White House who has never managed anything, not even his own household budget (see Tony Rezko cozy house deal). This fool is going to lose in a landslide.

Posted by: thinkwithyourbrain | September 16, 2008 10:22 PM | Report abuse

TO:
wunderwood | September 16, 2008 9:37 PM :

This corrects two typing error that would not have occurred ahd my typist type my posts. (Icannot type well, but I am not a typist.)

Your last parry's "Aw shucks," pseudo-folksy, fake down-home style does not save you from the consequences of your stupidity, but helps prove it. And you do not burrow into a haven with the tool of your daddy-reference and your suggestion that he and I would bond (an irrelevant unpremised prediction).

Your last source (http://www.englishforums.com/English/EmpathicAndEmpathetic/mbr/post.htm) says (ungrammatically and with illogical syntax): “It seems 'empathetic' is a combination of empathic and sympathetic.” The proposition proves both that “empathetic” is sloppy (and illogical) usage and that your source is a band of impoverished minds. I will not argue the point further, because you could not understand. Go forth in the peace of your self-induced intellectual narcosis, but do not multiply.

I confess, however, that I have enjoyed you. Similarly, when I was young and a rabid phallic narcissist, I enjoyed entering women from the rear (though never an**ly but only vag*na*ly), just as I enjoyed ramming myself FIGURATIVELY down the throats of all who tried to join issue with me.

But I am a grown-up now, because of an extensive psychotherapy wrought by one of the world's very, very few competent therapists. So, I shall desist, because my (legitimate) object was not injuring or threatening your ego (or anyone else's), but observing the language-failure-caused hopelessness of American journalism and American elections.

Posted by: Loup-bouc | September 16, 2008 10:11 PM

Posted by: Loup-bouc | September 16, 2008 10:21 PM | Report abuse

To borrow from Truman's playbook, Give 'em hell, Sarah and John, and tell the nation that it is the "do nothing" Pelosi Congress that is responsible for our economic and political woes, with Charlie Rangel and Barney Frank leading the way in their great job of congressional oversight of Wall Street.

Congress now has the lowest approval rating in the history of the Gallup poll and the Democrats are no longer the shoo in that they predicted. Drill, baby, drill.

Posted by: alance | September 16, 2008 10:20 PM | Report abuse

Three things stand out in Obama's letter which leave one wondering...


"The summit should consider best practice loan marketing, underwriting, and origination practices consistent with the recent (and overdue) regulators'with the recent (and overdue) regulators' Proposed Statement on Subprime Mortgage Lending."

▄ Of Course Mr. Obama, the fact that these standards were abandoned so that lower income people
could own homes is in part what got us into this mess.


* What standards investors should require of lenders, particularly with regard to verification of income and assets and the underwriting of borrowers based on fully indexed and fully amortized rates.

▄ You're not really being precise here Mr. Obama. Investors absorbed the risk which was once
just the lenders to absorb and so the lenders were no longer doing due diligence-they didn't have to.
Couple that with Grenspan's keeping interest rates too low too long and you have a recipe for
disaster.


* How to adopt principles of fair competition that promote affordability, transparency, non-discrimination, genuine consumer value, and competitive returns.

▄ Huh? You're not telling us anything here Senator, but if you could accomplish what your proposing
here you would probably win the presidency by acclamamtion. How indeed!

Posted by: George | September 16, 2008 10:19 PM | Report abuse

Eco. teacher,

Why can you accept the fact that the housing bubble has kicked the lower, middle class and young people the guts aplenty?

Now that they are getting a break and the upper class people are too selfish to let them have a decent shelter?

Posted by: pete | September 16, 2008 10:12 PM | Report abuse

TO:
wunderwood | September 16, 2008 9:37 PM :

Your last parry's “Aw shucks, pseudo-folksy, fake down-home style does not save you from the consequences of your stupidity, but helps prove it. And you do you burrow into a haven with the tool of your daddy-reference and your suggestion that he and I would bond (an irrelevant unpremised prediction).

Your last source (http://www.englishforums.com/English/EmpathicAndEmpathetic/mbr/post.htm) says (ungrammatically and with illogical syntax): “It seems 'empathetic' is a combination of empathic and sympathetic.” The proposition proves both that “empathetic” is sloppy (and illogical) usage and that your source is a band of impoverished minds. I will not argue the point further, because you could not understand. Go forth in the peace of your self-induced intellectual narcosis, but do not multiply.

I confess, however, that I have enjoyed you. Similarly, when I was young and a rabid phallic narcissist, I enjoyed entering women from the rear (though never an**ly but only vag*na*ly), just as I enjoyed ramming myself FIGURATIVELY down the throats of all who tried to join issue with me.

But I am a grown-up now, because of an extensive psychotherapy wrought by one of the world's very, very few competent therapists. So, I shall desist, because my (legitimate) object was not injuring or threatening your ego (or anyone else's), but observing the language-failure-caused hopelessness of American journalism and American elections.

Posted by: Loup-bouc | September 16, 2008 10:11 PM | Report abuse

cpk....uh, mccain's recent RNC fundraiser in florida was 50,000 per person.

Posted by: dorian | September 16, 2008 10:06 PM | Report abuse

Lower home prices hurt current home owners. There are more home owners than first-time home buyers. Yes, in lower prices help those buying a home, but for those currently holding mortages, to have the value of their home, less than the price of their mortgage means, when they do have to sell - they LOSE money! A strength of our economy has been the equity (value of the home OVER the remaining mortgage) homeowners have been able to acquire from their investment.

Posted by: Economics Teacher | September 16, 2008 10:01 PM | Report abuse

This is one of the best time ever to buy and own a house in America.
What does Obama doing, I can't believe it?
Screw it all up?

Posted by: pete | September 16, 2008 10:00 PM | Report abuse

Not so fast orrg1:

We are sending $700 Billion a year outside the country for oil. That has a lot to do with how are economy is functioning.

How about what Retired Geek has posted:
Want $10 Gallon Gas?
Keep electing Democrats!

ANWR Exploration
House Republicans:91%Supported
House Democrats: 86% Opposed

Coal-to-Liquid
House Republicans: 97% Supported
House Democrats: 78% Opposed

Oil Shale Exploration
House Republicans: 90% Supported
House Democrats: 86% Opposed

Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Exploration
House Republicans: 81% Supported
House Democrats: 83% Opposed

Refinery Increased Capacity
House Republicans: 97% Supported
House Democrats: 96% Opposed

By the way McCain was trying to address the things in Obama's letter back in 2005.
Check the congressional record.

Posted by: James | September 16, 2008 9:58 PM | Report abuse

I think Obama must be out of touch with the middle class when he is at a fundraiser that cost more per person than 2 years worth of mortgage payments for a middle class family.

Posted by: cpk | September 16, 2008 9:54 PM | Report abuse

pete said "Lower home price, incredibly, promotes ownership"

Okay...

Posted by: orrg1 | September 16, 2008 9:53 PM | Report abuse

Obama's letter shows how clueless he is.
Lower home price, incredibly, promotes ownership and that mostly at the expense of the nasty homeflippers, and morgage companies...

Posted by: pete | September 16, 2008 9:47 PM | Report abuse

As I thought,

I'm hearing lots of crickets! And the sound of a couple of "empty suits" scurrying away!

Posted by: orrg1 | September 16, 2008 9:46 PM | Report abuse

read my last post

Don't vonbob's words sound a little empty after you have carefully read Obama's letter to Bernanke and Paulson? He had a list of concrete, detailed proposals for dealing with the present crisis more than a year and a half ago. If he had been President, this would never have happened. And oh yeah, we never would have gone into Iraq, either. How many more qualifications do you need?

Posted by: orrg1 | September 16, 2008 9:44 PM | Report abuse

Oops, looks like my secret identity is revealed by WaPo. "wunderwood" is the one and only "i talk good". Again I ask... Whodathunkit?

Posted by: wunderwood | September 16, 2008 9:38 PM | Report abuse

Naw, Loup-bouc, I cited the drift-usage slime pot, http://www.thefreedictionary.com for 'empathetic,' rather than the OED or Websters, et al) because when I googled the word, that was the first hit.

It appears that I am not alone in accepting that source, but I guess it just explains the whole decline in civilization (or is that civilisation? I always forget).

I could have just as easily stumbled into Wikipedia, I suppose. Another slime-pot, no doubt. I wandered around on it a bit more and found a site called englishforums.com, which I wager is probably a hotbed of english types, ya think?

http://www.englishforums.com/English/EmpathicAndEmpathetic/mbr/post.htm

According to that site, these two words are not the same. Whodathunkit?

empathic= feel strongly about what you are saying.
empathetic= when you share feelings or opinions as if they were your own.

Seem like Mr. Balz may have had it right all along. According to one poster. But as my dad useta say "Websters? That's just one man's opinion." You and my dad would have gotten along famously, I am quite certain.

Posted by: wunderwood | September 16, 2008 9:37 PM | Report abuse

Librarie says " Mr. Obama is smoke & mirrors, no substance". This post that will make Librarie check out of here, because it shows how empty and meaningless his/her claim is.

We are presently in a crisis that is "a hundred year crisis" according to former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan.

More than one and a half years ago, when something still might have been done, McCain was telling everyone that "the Bush economy is strong". Palin was just entering office, and making PR splashes with ebay and so-on. She is still so uninformed that she is too afraid to sit for any more interviews. Imagine, a candidate for VP afraid to face reporters! Instead she keeps giving the same speech, not even taking out the parts that have been discredited, because there'd be nothing left!

On March 22, 2007, Barack Obama sent a letter to Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke and Secretary of the Treasury Henry BEGGING them to do something about the subprime mortgage crisis. Please read this carefully, and let us all know what you think of Librarie's judgement. It will be clear after reading this that the "Obama is an empty suit" claim is just a campaign talking point - one of the first lies in a long string. The "empty suit" is a LOT better fit for Palin!

Here is Obama's letter:

March 22, 2007

Dear Chairman Bernanke and Secretary Paulson,
There is grave concern in low-income communities about a potential coming wave of foreclosures. Because regulators are partly responsible for creating the environment that is leading to rising rates of home foreclosure in the subprime mortgage market, I urge you immediately to convene a homeownership preservation summit with leading mortgage lenders, investors, loan servicing organizations, consumer advocates, federal regulators and housing-related agencies to assess options for private sector responses to the challenge.
We cannot sit on the sidelines while increasing numbers of American families face the risk of losing their homes.
And while neither the government nor the private sector acting alone is capable of quickly balancing the important interests in widespread access to credit and responsible lending, both must act and act quickly.
Working together, the relevant private sector entities and regulators may be best positioned for quick and targeted responses to mitigate the danger. Rampant foreclosures are in nobody's interest, and I believe this is a case where all responsible industry players can share the objective of eliminating deceptive or abusive practices, preserving homeownership, and stabilizing housing markets.
The summit should consider best practice loan marketing, underwriting, and origination practices consistent with the recent (and overdue) regulators' Proposed Statement on Subprime Mortgage Lending. The summit participants should also evaluate options for independent loan counseling, voluntary loan restructuring, limited forbearance, and other possible workout strategies. I would also urge you to facilitate a serious conversation about the following:
* What standards investors should require of lenders, particularly with regard to verification of income and assets and the underwriting of borrowers based on fully indexed and fully amortized rates.
* How to facilitate and encourage appropriate intervention by loan servicing companies at the earliest signs of borrower difficulty.
* How to support independent community-based-organizations to provide counseling and work-out services to prevent foreclosure and preserve homeownership where practical.
* How to provide more effective information disclosure and financial education to ensure that borrowers are treated fairly and that deception is never a source of competitive advantage.
* How to adopt principles of fair competition that promote affordability, transparency, non-discrimination, genuine consumer value, and competitive returns.
* How to ensure adequate liquidity across all mortgage markets without exacerbating consumer and housing market vulnerability.
Of course, the adoption of voluntary industry reforms will not preempt government action to crack down on predatory lending practices, or to style new restrictions on subprime lending or short- term post-purchase interventions in certain cases. My colleagues on the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs have held important hearings on mortgage market turmoil and I expect the Committee will develop legislation.
Nevertheless, a consortium of industry-related service providers and public interest advocates may be able to bring quick and efficient relief to millions of at-risk homeowners and neighborhoods, even before Congress has had an opportunity to act. There is an opportunity here to bring different interests together in the best interests of American homeowners and the American economy. Please don't let this opportunity pass us by.

Posted by: orrg1 | September 16, 2008 9:33 PM | Report abuse

Housing price rising.
Liberals: Whoa, whoa...we can never afford to own house in our lifetime.

Housing price falling.
Liberals: Whoa, whoa...we may lose our house.

No wonder Obama keeps tossing your Liberal ass under the bus.
And I can not wait to see which one of you will be next.

Posted by: pete | September 16, 2008 9:30 PM | Report abuse

Dan Balz, in his staid manner, understates the obvious. Obama is a rookie, perhaps a nice person, an opportunist, and totally incapable of running the nation.

Democrats and independents like myself see a phony, and for that reason, nothing can fix Obama's problem. He is broken. He can heal and develop into a leader, but give him a few decades. His character is simply not developed enough.

Posted by: vonbob | September 16, 2008 9:26 PM | Report abuse

All the Republicans argue that they are best for the economy. Let's see how their philosophy compares to Democrats in terms of ACTUAL PERFORMANCE:

Stock market increase while Clinton was in office: more than 300%
While George Bush was in office: a measly 5% (Lost that much just yesterday!)

Increase in the debt while Clinton was in office: $1.4 trillion (last year in office, $200 billion surplus)
Increase in the debt while Bush was in office: $3.9 trillion (last year in office, record $405 billion deficit)

Jobs created while Clinton in office: 23 million
Jobs created whle Bush in office: 4.4 million and dropping by the month due to unemployment spiking - the worst job creation record of any President since the Great Depression.

Unemployment rate when Clinton left office: 4.2%
Unemployment rate when Bush left office: Now at 6.1% and climbing

And that's not even mentioning that now we're in the throes of an economic meltdown that Bush buddy Alan Greenspan has called "the worst in a hundred years".

During 75% of Bush's term, Republicans contolled both Congress and the Presidency, and conservatives held sway on the Supreme Court - all three Branches of Government. They still hold the Presidency, and have vetoed and filibustered every attempt to put the country on the right track.

How can anyone making less than a million bucks a year ,or even anyone making more, want four more years of this crap? Are you sure you can even survive it? Democratic ideas have been tested. They kick ass! Republican ideas have been tested. They suck!

And don't say it's because of divided government during the Clinton years. Clinton passed his big economic bill while Democrats held Congress, in 1993. If the government had been divided then, the bill wouldn't have passed, and the Clinton years would have been lackluster - Republican like years.

The problems we have now are because the Republicans controlled everything and passed their own crappy discredited policies for 6 all too long years. To fix that, we need Democrats leading the Executive and Legislative branches, otherwise we'll stay stuck in the ditch. 85% of the people say the country is going in the wrong direction - It's time to change horses!

You can't argue with the facts. Obama/Biden '08


Posted by: orrg1 | September 16, 2008 9:17 PM | Report abuse

Clearly Mr. Obama is done with his journey to the White House. He has spent millions & millions, and STILL cannot garner what he needs to convince people. That is because we just spent 8!! long years with someone with no experience, and do not want a repeat of this. Mr. Obama is smoke & mirrors, no substance, and THAT is the problem. He just does not have the experience. He talks about "change", but people don't have a clue what he means. This is just incredible after all this time, and the millions he has spent.
If Mr. Obama was a true patriot and cared about his country, he would step aside and let the true legitiment Democratic candidate, by 18+ million HISTORICAL votes, Hillary Clinton, make the run to the White House. THIS! is our only hope. Mr. Obama has split the Democratic party with his polirization and he obviously is a misogynist & racist.

Posted by: librairie | September 16, 2008 9:17 PM | Report abuse

OBAMA CAMP HITS BACK AT IRAQ DOUBLE-TALK CLAIM

PUEBLO, Colorado (AFP) — Barack Obama's White House campaign angrily denied Monday a report that he had secretly urged the Iraqis to postpone a deal to withdraw US troops until after November's election.

In the New York Post, conservative Iranian-born columnist Amir Taheri quoted Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari as saying the Democrat made the demand when he visited Baghdad in July, while publicly demanding an early withdrawal.

"He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington," Zebari said in an interview, according to Taheri.

...

But Obama's national security spokeswoman Wendy Morigi said Taheri's article bore "as much resemblance to the truth as a McCain campaign commercial."

In fact, Obama had told the Iraqis that they should not rush through a "Strategic Framework Agreement" governing the future of US forces until after President George W. Bush leaves office, she said.

In the face of resistance from Bush, the Democrat has long said that any such agreement must be reviewed by the US Congress as it would tie a future administration's hands on Iraq.

"Barack Obama has never urged a delay in negotiations, nor has he urged a delay in immediately beginning a responsible drawdown of our combat brigades," Morigi said.

"These outright distortions will not changes the facts -- Senator Obama is the only candidate who will safely and responsibly end the war in Iraq and refocus our attention on the real threat: a resurgent Al-Qaeda and Taliban along the Afghanistan/Pakistan border."

Last Tuesday, Bush announced plans to remove 8,000 US troops from Iraq in the coming months and send 4,500 to Afghanistan by January.

Obama said the president was belatedly coming round to his own way of thinking, but also accused Bush of "tinkering around the edges" and "kicking the can down the road to the next president."

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hi9TDNHvuBZpFsO8ZbiFYsnbIl3A

Sounds like just more distortions and lies from the McCain campaign.

Posted by: wunderwood | September 16, 2008 9:10 PM | Report abuse

Wunderwood:
Republicans are denying this as if it matters.

Besides the GOP cannot overturn or supersede Michigan voting law. If people
are legitimately legally registered then they can vote. It's as simple as that.
You better clean up your ACORNs first
and then we can talk about lawsuits.


Posted by: George | September 16, 2008 9:09 PM | Report abuse

TO:
“I talk good” | September 16, 2008 7:55 PM :

Alas, you miss the point utterly — because you cannot READ, cannot WRITE, so cannot THINK (and those troubles explain your citing the drift-usage slime-pot http://www.thefreedictionary.com for “empathetic,” rather than the OED or Webster's FIRST [not 2d or 3rd or 4th] International).

Question-mark placement is irrelevant to the point. Like period-placement and comma-placement, it is a matter of English language convention, not one of logic. (The French language period-placement and comma-placement conventions are different; and, though, generally, French grammar is the less logical, its punctuation-placement conventions are the more logical. Still, punctuation-PLACEMENT affects thought-quality just very rarely.)

Once this law professor [Loup-bouc] worked under an acting dean who acted just seldom as if decanal rather than a man acting the part of dean. But somehow-serendipitously he stumbled on the one strong, useful proposition his mind grasped ever: ”Law School is a long remedial reading course,” which proposition implies that Law School is also a long remedial speech course — so, a long course of learning how to think, since thinking is just creating syntax.

The matter is much and widely pertinent “to the issues.” One sad reason is: McCain and Obama and most pundits and journalists and politicians and voters — most Americans — suffer poor language skill and, so, cannot identify the critical issues or perceive their contents or implications or imagine how to resolve them wisely. Just so, McCain cannot control his mouth because he cannot control his thought; and Obama must “nuance” because he cannot control logically the logic of his reading, listening, speaking, or writing.

Washington, John & John Quincy Adams, Madison, Jefferson, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Taft (though he performed better as Sixth Circuit judge and Supreme Court Chief Justice), Wilson (before he suffered crippling depression), and Eisenhower governed well (though sometimes Taft and Wilson did not govern fairly) because, to and for both themselves and others, they read, wrote, and spoke well — because they perceived and created syntax precisely and elegantly.

Posted by: Loup-bouc | September 16, 2008 9:03 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: wunderwood | September 16, 2008 9:03 PM | Report abuse

scott i never realized - who knew? Obama was plotting to overthrow the government by having an army of latin americans invade us. too bad bush beat him to it.

stop reading thst crap scott. everyone knows obama works for the muslims.

Posted by: seems to me | September 16, 2008 9:02 PM | Report abuse

Bumper Sticker!

I ♥ Sarah!

Posted by: George | September 16, 2008 9:00 PM | Report abuse

Read what conservative David Brooks has to say:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/16/opinion/16brooks.html?hp

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 8:57 PM | Report abuse

Bumper Stickers!!!

Repower America.
Obama/Biden '08

A Working Person Voting For a Republican
Is Like a Chicken Voting for Colonel Sanders.

Republican Health Plan:
Don't Get Sick

Trillion Dollar War.
McCain.

Obama/Biden
For a Return to Sanity.

Enough!
Obama/Biden '08

Vote For Obama
Isn't it time a
Smart Guy was Elected?

I knew McCain 2000.
And you, McCain 2008 are no McCain 2000.

McCain:
Sad Pawn of the Religious Wrong.

McCain:
Lockstep with Bush

McCain:
A Nuclear Temper

News to McCain:
"Yee-haw" is not a foreign policy.

John McCain
for Retirement

Are you Better off Now
than you were Eight Years ago?

Ban Books.
Vote Palin/McCain

McCain/Palin
A Bridge to Nowhere

Palin's Bridge to Nowhere
"I was for it before I was against it."

Palin's Alaska:
So much Pork she's at risk for Trichinosis.

Vote Obama/Biden '08!
(Wolves & Polar Bears approve this message.)

McCain:
Ridin' the Double-Talk Express

McCain/Bush
(Gutter) Politics as Usual

Jesus was a community organizer.
Pontius Pilate was a governor.

=================


THAT WAS AWESOME


-----------------

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 8:56 PM | Report abuse

I LOVE AsperGirl!

I ♥ AsperGirl!

Posted by: George | September 16, 2008 8:54 PM | Report abuse

Obama's Double-Dealing Diplomacy
1 hour, 52 minutes ago (9-16-08)
Investor's Business Daily


Election '08: Barack Obama premised his campaign on calling for a speedy withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. But now he's been quietly telling Iraq "not so fast." It's part of a deceptive pattern.


Election: Barack Obama, who premised his campaign on calling for a speedy withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, has now been quietly telling Iraq "not so fast." It's part of a deceptive pattern.Iraq's Foreign Minister Moshyar Zebari told the New York Post's Amir Taheri that Obama made delaying the troops' return a key theme of his talks with Iraqi leaders during his campaign stop in Baghdad last July.

"He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the U.S. elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington," Zebari told Teheri, on the record.

Funny, that's not what Obama told voters. He has made an immediate pullout the cornerstone of his campaign. Taheri's report signals the Democratic standard-bearer would manipulate the war's end for political advantage and is willing to deceive voters to do it.

This in itself is reprehensible. But his secret calls also leave U.S. troops unnecessarily in harm's way. It's the kind of foreign policy meddling that serves Obama's interests over the national interest.

"Obama has given Iraqis the impression that he doesn't want Iraq to appear anything like a success, let alone a victory, for America," Taheri reported. "To be credible, his foreign-policy philosophy requires Iraq to be seen as a failure, a disaster, a quagmire, a pig with lipstick or any of the other apocalyptic adjectives used by the American defeat industry in the past five years."

Can Obama be trusted? We ask because he's shown a pattern of secretive double-dealing with voters, not just in his talking about small town voters one way in Scranton and another way in San Francisco, as Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin pointed out, but particularly in foreign affairs.

It dates back to at least February, when Obama's economic adviser, Austan Goolsbee, secretly told the Canadian embassy that Obama's demagoguery against NAFTA in the primaries was just a Styrofoam-pillar bid to win the Ohio vote.

Obama's pattern of deception continued. In March, Colombian troops raided a FARC terrorist camp in Ecuador and recovered a terrorist computer belonging to a top FARC warlord, Raul Reyes.

Computer e-mails revealed that someone who knew Obama's positions had secretly met with the terrorists and assured them Obama would cut U.S. military aid under Plan Colombia and veto its free trade pact. Both are major goals of the Marxist terrorists aligned with America's enemies.

Subsequent events confirmed this. Obama did come out in favor of shutting Colombia out of free trade. More disturbingly, Obama adviser Daniel Restrepo last week told Colombia's Radio Caracol that Obama planned to convert the military aid Colombia needs to crush terrorists into social aid programs that don't.

That's not the end of it. Now Obama is double-dealing with Iraqi officials to leave American troops in harm's way and prolong the appearance of war long enough to call it a failure and win votes.

The astonishing thing about Obama's deals is they're the very thing Democrats accused Republicans of without a shred of proof.

They accused Richard Nixon of making a secret deal with the North Vietnamese to prolong the Vietnam war enough to presumably win election in 1968.

Years later, in 1980, they accused Ronald Reagan of making a secret deal with Iranian terrorists holding U.S. diplomats hostage to win election over incumbent Jimmy Carter.

Neither of these claims, often repeated by leftist historians, has ever been proven. But the statement of Iraq's foreign minister, speaking to a leading writer on foreign policy, is considerably stronger as evidence. It signals that Obama places politics over the national interest to the extent that he would work against his own public positions to gull voters into electing him.

It's the absolute opposite of John McCain's courageous position supporting the surge in Iraq, even as politicos were warning him he'd lose the election for it. "I'd rather lose an election than lose a war," McCain said.

With Obama's promises to sit down with dictators in Venezuela, Cuba, Syria and Iran, voters have a right to ask if he's made any deals at odds with his public condemnations of them, too. Before he starts acting like president, he needs to come clean to voters and reveal his true positions. Whatever they are, voters have a right to know.


Posted by: Scott | September 16, 2008 8:54 PM | Report abuse

Now its time for the Ayers assassins to make their move. But this by itself is not enough nor is the farrakan association. No some unifying glue is needed to make all the crap stick to obama. Thats the october surprixe. Put up or shut up. Otherwise crawl back under your rocks.

Posted by: seems to me | September 16, 2008 8:52 PM | Report abuse

Bad news for the USA is good news for the Democrats. That says it all Patriot.

Where is the compassionate Democrat?

Probably fixing to vote for McCain

Posted by: Jerome | September 16, 2008 8:51 PM | Report abuse

NoMoreFourMore:

So now you're comparing Obama to Jesus?

Does the word blasphemy come to mind?

Lord forgive them for they know not what they say.

Posted by: James | September 16, 2008 8:48 PM | Report abuse

As they say, bad news for the USA is good news for the Democrats.

Posted by: Patriot | September 16, 2008 8:46 PM | Report abuse

EVERYTHING ASPERMORON JUST WROTE IS A LIE. SHE DOES IT EVERYDAY ON EVERY BLOG, A REAL PARASITE. SHE WOULD HAVE YOU BELIEVE OBAMA HANDED OUT MILLIONS OF TAX DOLLARS TO BLACK PEOPLE IN WARDS. ASPERMORONS' PARENTS ARE LOCKED UP IN A WARD IN DOWNTOWN CRACKERVILLE WHERE THEY WERE INCARCERATED FOR IMPERSONATING BIPEDS! YOU SHOULD GO AWAY ASPERGIRL, YOU ARE A VIRUS, A PLAGUE, A LYING BLACK HOLE IN THE GALACTIC WRAP.

Posted by: bob II | September 16, 2008 8:46 PM | Report abuse

Yes Obama, no neglect on the menu :)
Obama/Biden indeed!!

Posted by: Obama2008 | September 16, 2008 8:45 PM | Report abuse

Alveda King says Nobama due to pro-abortion position

CNN interviewed Dr. Alveda King, Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s, niece, as one African-American voter who does not support Barack Obama due to his pro-abortion position.

Alevda is a smart decent caring committed
courageous christian person

Posted by: James | September 16, 2008 8:44 PM | Report abuse

Repower America.
Obama/Biden '08

A Working Person Voting For a Republican
Is Like a Chicken Voting for Colonel Sanders.

Republican Health Plan:
Don't Get Sick

Trillion Dollar War.
McCain.

Obama/Biden
For a Return to Sanity.

Enough!
Obama/Biden '08

Vote For Obama
Isn't it time a
Smart Guy was Elected?

I knew McCain 2000.
And you, McCain 2008 are no McCain 2000.

McCain:
Sad Pawn of the Religious Wrong.

McCain:
Lockstep with Bush

McCain:
A Nuclear Temper

News to McCain:
"Yee-haw" is not a foreign policy.

John McCain
for Retirement

Are you Better off Now
than you were Eight Years ago?

Ban Books.
Vote Palin/McCain

McCain/Palin
A Bridge to Nowhere

Palin's Bridge to Nowhere
"I was for it before I was against it."

Palin's Alaska:
So much Pork she's at risk for Trichinosis.

Vote Obama/Biden '08!
(Wolves & Polar Bears approve this message.)

McCain:
Ridin' the Double-Talk Express

McCain/Bush
(Gutter) Politics as Usual

Jesus was a community organizer.
Pontius Pilate was a governor.

Posted by: NoMoreFourMore | September 16, 2008 8:43 PM | Report abuse

hillarys campaign said there would be an october surprise for obama. is this a good surprise or a bad one?

Posted by: seems to me | September 16, 2008 8:43 PM | Report abuse

Can anyone explain this to me: Darth Vader could sense the Force in Luke Skywalker from miles away because Luke was his son. However, Princess Leia was his daughter, and he never sensed the Force in her, even though he was standing right next to her in Episode IV. What gives? I see an anaolgy here in modern politics - Joe Biden is portrayed by the press as some sort of experienced expert, but Sarah Palin's executive experience is ignored and overlooked. Barack Obama = Darth Vader. Johb McCain = Obi Wan Kenobi. Sarah Palin = Princess Leia. The good guys are Republicans. The bad guys are democrats. I'm voting McCain/Palin 2008/2012. Palin/Romney 2016/2020.

Posted by: Dave | September 16, 2008 8:42 PM | Report abuse

Check out this video contrasting John McCain's rosy economic outlook with that of his hero, Alan Greenspan:

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

Posted by: straight talk my a** | September 16, 2008 8:41 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Magoo who's 72 doesn't know what timezone he's in and a racist pig who thinks he has a right to murder innocents for oil and their improvement. REPUBLICAN PSYCHOPATHS IN B-52'S. The let Bin Laden go. Wall Street and stock value is in a death spiral and the MORON PARTY WANTS TO REBUILD JAWJA BY THE SEA AND IT AIN'T OURS. IDIOTS! No one but a Republican Moron would even consider voting Republican EVER AGAIN FOR ANYTHING!!

Posted by: bob II | September 16, 2008 8:41 PM | Report abuse

GEE WONDER WHY OBAMA LEFT THIS OFF HIS RESUME?

4 YEARS OF EXEC EXPERIENCE IN $100 MILLION PROJECT

OBAMA'S FAILURE DIRECTING THE ANNENBERG PROJECT:

The papers have recently been opened from Barack Obama's only executive leadership experience, helming an expensive educational reform effort in Chicago, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC), a more than $100 million program that failed, big time, according to the project's own final report.

Unrepentant terrorist William Ayers (whom Obama claimed in the Philadelphia debate was merely a "neighbor") was head of the operating arm of the CAC, working with Obama on distributing scores of millions of dollars to grantees in the wards of the city. Obama was a founding chairman.

Obama doesn't claim his 4 years on this project when listing his experience. The media has ignored it for him. A timeline of Obama's career from George Washington University omits it.

The Obama & Ayers-led program flopped, squandering enormous amounts of money, public resources and the time of many public employees in the process.

More at:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/08/obamas_lost_annenberg_years_co.html

About the Obama campaign's current fight over claims about the project & attempts by the University of Chicago's attempts to bar access to its papers:
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/08/26/newly-released-documents-highlight-obamas-relationship-with-ayers/

An update concerning the mysterious files for the CAC, for which Obama chaired the board for five years until early 2000. A liberal blogger revealed on Sept. 6 that it a CAC executive director blocked the National Review's Stanley Kurtz from accessing the CAC files to investigate the William Ayers-Barack Obama working relationship.

See: http://globallabor.blogspot.com/2008/09/obamaayers-update-chicago-annenberg.html

The Annenberg project, by the way, also funds factcheck.org, which has been doing some very biased & false fact checking this year benefitting Obama's campaign.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 16, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

I am an African-American Democrat, and, contrary to what many pseudo-conservatives suggest, I am quite conservative in my politics.

I do believe that the experiment, that has been social welfare, as it exists, has done more harm than good to the poor of this nation. Not only African American's but ALL poor, to include poor whites.

However, I too, am a Christian, and, contrary to what many pseudo Conservative, pseudo-Christians believe, I recognize that Christianity requires that "Christians" follow the living example of Jesus Christ. An example that embraced, not cast aside, the poor. His love was greatest for "the least of these". That, to me brings about social, political and ecomomic requirements onto His followers.

I see those that, today, call theselves "conservative", though they claim religion, represent all that Christ despised in humanity; loathing, selfishness, anger, greed and hatred of anyone in a diffent station in life. That is not of Christ. Hence, it is not a political affiliation that I could ever embrace.

You can read down this blog at self described "conservative" commentary and I would put money on the fact you could not find any symblance of Christ in the words that they use; quite the opposite.

I am a Democrat because I have an obligation to Christ greater than I do to worldly affairs. Republicans today are, again, in my analysis, the furthest reach from those whom Christ loved the most.

Though I have serious issue with giving to those who don't try and who give up on life, I recognize the biblical obligation to care for my common man; particularly the poor, the orphaned, the forgotten. I don't have the answer regarding the appropriate balance. I just know that to align myself with the mean spirited nature of what has become the GOP, is just anti-(Christ like).

I will be voting Obama/Biden 08.

Posted by: Concernedaboutdc | September 16, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

I am an African-American Democrat, and, contrary to what many pseudo-conservatives suggest, I am quite conservative in my politics.

I do believe that the experiment, that has been social welfare, as it exists, has done more harm than good to the poor of this nation. Not only African American's but ALL poor, to include poor whites.

However, I too, am a Christian, and, contrary to what many pseudo Conservative, pseudo-Christians believe, I recognize that Christianity requires that "Christians" follow the living example of Jesus Christ. An example that embraced, not cast aside, the poor. His love was greatest for "the least of these". That, to me brings about social, political and ecomomic requirements onto His followers.

I see those that, today, call theselves "conservative", though they claim religion, represent all that Christ despised in humanity; loathing, selfishness, anger, greed and hatred of anyone in a diffent station in life. That is not of Christ. Hence, it is not a political affiliation that I could ever embrace.

You can read down this blog at self described "conservative" commentary and I would put money on the fact you could not find any symblance of Christ in the words that they use; quite the opposite.

I am a Democrat because I have an obligation to Christ greater than I do to worldly affairs. Republicans today are, again, in my analysis, the furthest reach from those whom Christ loved the most.

Though I have serious issue with giving to those who don't try and who give up on life, I recognize the biblical obligation to care for my common man; particularly the poor, the orphaned, the forgotten. I don't have the answer regarding the appropriate balance. I just know that to align myself with the mean spirited nature of what has become the GOP, is just anti-(Christ like).

I will be voting Obama/Biden 08.

Posted by: Concernedaboutdc | September 16, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

I am an African-American Democrat, and, contrary to what many pseudo-conservatives suggest, I am quite conservative in my politics.

I do believe that the experiment, that has been social welfare, as it exists, has done more harm than good to the poor of this nation. Not only African American's but ALL poor, to include poor whites.

However, I too, am a Christian, and, contrary to what many pseudo Conservative, pseudo-Christians believe, I recognize that Christianity requires that "Christians" follow the living example of Jesus Christ. An example that embraced, not cast aside, the poor. His love was greatest for "the least of these". That, to me brings about social, political and ecomomic requirements onto His followers.

I see those that, today, call theselves "conservative", though they claim religion, represent all that Christ despised in humanity; loathing, selfishness, anger, greed and hatred of anyone in a diffent station in life. That is not of Christ. Hence, it is not a political affiliation that I could ever embrace.

You can read down this blog at self described "conservative" commentary and I would put money on the fact you could not find any symblance of Christ in the words that they use; quite the opposite.

I am a Democrat because I have an obligation to Christ greater than I do to worldly affairs. Republicans today are, again, in my analysis, the furthest reach from those whom Christ loved the most.

Though I have serious issue with giving to those who don't try and who give up on life, I recognize the biblical obligation to care for my common man; particularly the poor, the orphaned, the forgotten. I don't have the answer regarding the appropriate balance. I just know that to align myself with the mean spirited nature of what has become the GOP, is just anti-(Christ like).

I will be voting Obama/Biden 08.

Posted by: Concernedaboutdc | September 16, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

I am an African-American Democrat, and, contrary to what many pseudo-conservatives suggest, I am quite conservative in my politics.

I do believe that the experiment, that has been social welfare, as it exists, has done more harm than good to the poor of this nation. Not only African American's but ALL poor, to include poor whites.

However, I too, am a Christian, and, contrary to what many pseudo Conservative, pseudo-Christians believe, I recognize that Christianity requires that "Christians" follow the living example of Jesus Christ. An example that embraced, not cast aside, the poor. His love was greatest for "the least of these". That, to me brings about social, political and ecomomic requirements onto His followers.

I see those that, today, call theselves "conservative", though they claim religion, represent all that Christ despised in humanity; loathing, selfishness, anger, greed and hatred of anyone in a diffent station in life. That is not of Christ. Hence, it is not a political affiliation that I could ever embrace.

You can read down this blog at self described "conservative" commentary and I would put money on the fact you could not find any symblance of Christ in the words that they use; quite the opposite.

I am a Democrat because I have an obligation to Christ greater than I do to worldly affairs. Republicans today are, again, in my analysis, the furthest reach from those whom Christ loved the most.

Though I have serious issue with giving to those who don't try and who give up on life, I recognize the biblical obligation to care for my common man; particularly the poor, the orphaned, the forgotten. I don't have the answer regarding the appropriate balance. I just know that to align myself with the mean spirited nature of what has become the GOP, is just anti-(Christ like).

I will be voting Obama/Biden 08.

Posted by: Concernedaboutdc | September 16, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

Can anyone explain this to me: Darth Vader could sense the Force in Luke Skywalker from miles away because Luke was his son. However, Princess Leia was his daughter, and he never sensed the Force in her, even though he was standing right next to her in Episode IV. What gives? I see an anaolgy here in modern politics - Joe Biden is portrayed by the press as some sort of experienced expert, but Sarah Palin's executive experience is ignored and overlooked. Barack Obama = Darth Vader. Johb McCain = Obi Wan Kenobi. Sarah Palin = Princess Leia. The good guys are Republicans. The bad guys are democrats. I'm voting McCain/Palin 2008/2012. Palin/Romney 2016/2020.

Posted by: Dave | September 16, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

George's Culture of Life or whatever these inbred hicks are calling themselves today set Iraqi chillen on fire from 40,000 feet for breakfast and then say a prayer above their oil patch on the sand. parasites on crusade for crude. they're not christians. they're not human. they're the Republicans slaughterin chillen for their betterment. Palin is an idiot and a pathological liar. Eh!!

Posted by: bob II | September 16, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

One Basic economic fact you need to know:
The government takes. It takes money. It takes property. It produces nothing. It does not earn anything. When it tries to
interpose itself it too often makes things worse.

It re-directs wealth according to the whims
of a few powerful people in Washington(elected and unelected).
Before Jimmie Carter, there was no Depts' of Education and Energy. We are spending $500-600 billion combined each and every for these two behemoths. Are we getting our money's worth? Who cares?

It does provide some necessary services for sure. Unlike private industry services,however, there is no competition.
So there is no economic referendum which would demonstrate(and kill off) whatever
services are the least needed or no longer justified or necessary.

What is a billion dollars?

If you spent $1000 a minute 16 hours a day(I'm allowing 8 hours for sleep, eating, etc.) it
would take over a thousand years to spend a billion dollars!


There is also the problem of waste and inefficiency. All these things
can only be addressed by putting constraints on governmnet income(taxes)
and through legislation, eliminating or reducing unneeded programs and thereby feeding
capital to the private sector.

Government has grown to be such a large sector of the economy that it is
a balancing act to get it under control. The beast has to be tamed,though.

Posted by: George | September 16, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

How can anyone with a brain reelect a Republican after what they have done. They are on TIMEOUT. GO TO THE CORNER AND DON'T COME OUT AND KILL ANYONE FOR OIL FOR EIGHT YEARS. Enough! Actually, much much much much more than enought.

Posted by: bob II | September 16, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

One Basic economic fact you need to know:
The government takes. It takes money. It takes property. It produces nothing. It does not earn anything. When it tries to
interpose itself it too often makes things worse.

It re-directs wealth according to the whims
of a few powerful people in Washington(elected and unelected).
Before Jimmie Carter, there was no Depts' of Education and Energy. We are spending $500-600 billion combined each and every for these two behemoths. Are we getting our money's worth? Who cares?

It does provide some necessary services for sure. Unlike private industry services,however, there is no competition.
So there is no economic referendum which would demonstrate(and kill off) whatever
services are the least needed or no longer justified or necessary.

What is a billion dollars?

If you spent $1000 a minute 16 hours a day(I'm allowing 8 hours for sleep, eating, etc.) it
would take over a thousand years to spend a billion dollars!


There is also the problem of waste and inefficiency. All these things
can only be addressed by putting constraints on governmnet income(taxes)
and through legislation, eliminating or reducing unneeded programs and thereby feeding
capital to the private sector.

Government has grown to be such a large sector of the economy that it is
a balancing act to get it under control. The beast has to be tamed,though.

Posted by: George | September 16, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

While you are seeking change Mr. Obama, please explain to us all WHY you provided your wife's employer with a PORK EARMARK of $1M after she was promoted...

Posted by: ginny | September 16, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

While you are seeking change Mr. Obama, please explain to us all WHY you provided your wife's employer with a PORK EARMARK of $1M after she was promoted...

Posted by: ginny | September 16, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

Bumper Stickers!!!

Repower America.
Obama/Biden '08

A Working Person Voting For a Republican
Is Like a Chicken Voting for Colonel Sanders.

Republican Health Plan:
Don't Get Sick

Trillion Dollar War.
McCain.

Obama/Biden
For a Return to Sanity.

Enough!
Obama/Biden '08

Vote For Obama
Isn't it time a
Smart Guy was Elected?

I knew McCain 2000.
And you, McCain 2008 are no McCain 2000.

McCain:
Sad Pawn of the Religious Wrong.

McCain:
Lockstep with Bush

McCain:
A Nuclear Temper

News to McCain:
"Yee-haw" is not a foreign policy.

John McCain
for Retirement

Are you Better off Now
than you were Eight Years ago?

Ban Books.
Vote Palin/McCain

McCain/Palin
A Bridge to Nowhere

Palin's Bridge to Nowhere
"I was for it before I was against it."

Palin's Alaska:
So much Pork she's at risk for Trichinosis.

Vote Obama/Biden '08!
(Wolves & Polar Bears approve this message.)

McCain:
Ridin' the Double-Talk Express

McCain/Bush
(Gutter) Politics as Usual

Jesus was a community organizer.
Pontius Pilate was a governor.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

Bumper Stickers!!!

Repower America.
Obama/Biden '08

A Working Person Voting For a Republican
Is Like a Chicken Voting for Colonel Sanders.

Republican Health Plan:
Don't Get Sick

Trillion Dollar War.
McCain.

Obama/Biden
For a Return to Sanity.

Enough!
Obama/Biden '08

Vote For Obama
Isn't it time a
Smart Guy was Elected?

I knew McCain 2000.
And you, McCain 2008 are no McCain 2000.

McCain:
Sad Pawn of the Religious Wrong.

McCain:
Lockstep with Bush

McCain:
A Nuclear Temper

News to McCain:
"Yee-haw" is not a foreign policy.

John McCain
for Retirement

Are you Better off Now
than you were Eight Years ago?

Ban Books.
Vote Palin/McCain

McCain/Palin
A Bridge to Nowhere

Palin's Bridge to Nowhere
"I was for it before I was against it."

Palin's Alaska:
So much Pork she's at risk for Trichinosis.

Vote Obama/Biden '08!
(Wolves & Polar Bears approve this message.)

McCain:
Ridin' the Double-Talk Express

McCain/Bush
(Gutter) Politics as Usual

Jesus was a community organizer.
Pontius Pilate was a governor.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

While you are seeking change Mr. Obama, please explain to us all WHY you provided your wife's employer with a PORK EARMARK of $1M after she was promoted...

Posted by: ginny | September 16, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

we have seen mccains substance = lies, distortions, pretending to be the solution to a problem when hes plainly the cause of it.
Who are you going to believe mccain or your own damn lying eyes?

Posted by: seems to me | September 16, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

Check out this new video on Alan Greenspan's contradiction of John McCain's rosy economic outlook:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAMDeGdOkZg

Posted by: Did I mention I don't know nothing about the economy? | September 16, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

hillarys campaign said there would be an october surprise for obama. is this a good surprise or a bad one?

Posted by: seems to me | September 16, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

I am an African-American Democrat, and, contrary to what many pseudo-conservatives suggest, I am quite conservative in my politics.

I do believe that the experiment, that has been social welfare, as it exists, has done more harm than good to the poor of this nation. Not only African American's but ALL poor, to include poor whites.

However, I too, am a Christian, and, contrary to what many pseudo Conservative, pseudo-Christians believe, I recognize that Christianity requires that "Christians" follow the living example of Jesus Christ. An example that embraced, not cast aside, the poor. His love was greatest for "the least of these". That, to me brings about social, political and ecomomic requirements onto His followers.

I see those that, today, call theselves "conservative", though they claim religion, represent all that Christ despised in humanity; loathing, selfishness, anger, greed and hatred of anyone in a diffent station in life. That is not of Christ. Hence, it is not a political affiliation that I could ever embrace.

You can read down this blog at self described "conservative" commentary and I would put money on the fact you could not find any symblance of Christ in the words that they use; quite the opposite.

I am a Democrat because I have an obligation to Christ greater than I do to worldly affairs. Republicans today are, again, in my analysis, the furthest reach from those whom Christ loved the most.

Though I have serious issue with giving to those who don't try and who give up on life, I recognize the biblical obligation to care for my common man; particularly the poor, the orphaned, the forgotten. I don't have the answer regarding the appropriate balance. I just know that to align myself with the mean spirited nature of what has become the GOP, is just anti-(Christ like).

I will be voting Obama/Biden 08.

Posted by: concernedaboutdc | September 16, 2008 8:36 PM | Report abuse

Stop spewing you're elitist bs. It's McCain who doesn't know how many houses he owns, its McCain who claims people qualify as rich if they make more than $5 million a year, and its McCain proposing MORE tax breaks for the rich as the middle class is suffering. The truth is McCain is out of touch. The republicans economic philosophy had their chance but this is what we've ended up with. Our country can't afford another 4 years.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 8:30 PM | Report abuse

How can anyone with a brain reelect a Republican after what they have done. They are on TIMEOUT. GO TO THE CORNER AND DON'T COME OUT AND KILL ANYONE FOR OIL FOR EIGHT YEARS. Enough! Actually, much much much much more than enought.

Posted by: bob II | September 16, 2008 8:27 PM | Report abuse

Obama and abortion

From: “Life Lies: Barack Obama & Born-Alive “

By David Freddoso, National Review


In 2001, Senator Barack Obama was the only member of the Illinois senate to speak against a bill that would have recognized premature abortion survivors as “persons.” The bill was in response to a Chicago-area hospital that was leaving such babies to die. Obama voted “present” on the bill after denouncing it. (In Illinois present is the same as “no”) It passed the state Senate but died in a state house committee.

In 2003, a similar bill came before Obama’s health committee. He voted against it. But this time, the legislation was slightly different. This latter version was identical to the federal Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, which by then had already passed the U.S. Senate unanimously (with a hearty endorsement even from abortion advocate Sen. Barbara Boxer) and had been signed into law by President Bush.

Sen. Obama is currently misleading people about what he voted against, specifically claiming that the bill he voted against in his committee lacked “neutrality” language on Roe v. Wade. The bill did contain this language. He even participated in the unanimous vote to put it in.

But he voted against the final bill anyway.


Mr. Obama's Pro-Life (National Right to Life) rating=
2005 0%,
2006 0%,
2007 0%
His Pro-Abortion (NARAL) rating=
2005 100%,
2006 100%,
2007 100%

Obama called National Right To Life liars until they went to the archives of the Illinois legislature(they keep records you Know) to prove the truth about what the record said.

Posted by: George | September 16, 2008 8:27 PM | Report abuse

Has anyone else noticed McCain er, borrowing Obama's lines recently? Like "enough is enough" etc? Why do you think that is?

Posted by: Timothy Morton | September 16, 2008 8:25 PM | Report abuse

It looks like mccain and company better get their october surprise out now.
The september surprise caught them off guard and flat footed.

Posted by: seems to me | September 16, 2008 8:25 PM | Report abuse

Dan Balz is one more unofficial Obama coach. His latest unsolicited advice to his "handsome prince from Chicago" is to exploit the state of the economy to hit McCain. Obama criticized McCain for suggesting constitution of a committee to find a solution to the crisis in the financial services industry. Pray what is his miracle solution as he claims to understand the problem well enough?

It is this obfuscation that has cost Obama his lead. Voters have grown weary of his empty rhetoric and have seen through his facade of using style to cover up his utter lack of substance!

Posted by: Espi | September 16, 2008 8:22 PM | Report abuse

1) McCain lies big time every time he's told Americans that Obama will raise OUR taxes. Palin lied about doing away with earmarks and telling Congress "Thanks but no thanks" about the Bridge to Nowhere.

2)One can't be a maverick when one kowtows to their parties big wigs. Is McCain a maverick? . . He voted with Bush 90% of the time, and he appointed Palin as his VP nominee. NOW THAT'S KOWTOWING.

3) Deregulation belongs squarely to the Republicans, and that is a big, big reason for the economic downturn.

4) Solution: . . Vote for a real change agent, vote for Obama.

Posted by: Coldcomfort | September 16, 2008 8:22 PM | Report abuse

gschwartz1 I am pretty sure that's worth reading, but would you please summarize for those that are not going to read it all? Just make some highlights and link back to the article next time.

Posted by: Busy Bee | September 16, 2008 8:21 PM | Report abuse

Three majority of mortgages in the United States go through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Top Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Campaign Contributions, 1989-2008 Name Office Party/State Total 1. Dodd, Christopher J S Democrat-CT $133,900 2. Kerry, John S D-MA $111,000 3. Obama, Barack S D-IL $105,849 4. Clinton, Hillary S D-NY $75,550 5. Kanjorski, Paul E H D-PA $65,500

Mccain was one of the people who wanted to reform these behemoths but the Democrats didn't want to go along.

Posted by: George | September 16, 2008 8:20 PM | Report abuse

George: "So what good is having a Republican in the White House? Well, Democrats would like to force all hospitals including christian affiliated ones to do abortions and other immoral procedures if they accept Federal money. Republicans will fight this. Democrats don't mind if I take your daughter across
state lines to procure an abortion even without your consent as a parent. Republicans fight against this sort of thing. I could go on...."

You could, George, but then you would still be lying. Prove these assertions with some facts. Name a single time that Barack Obama's campaign has said that it is okay to take someone's daughter across state lines to procure an abortion without parental consent. Name a single time their campaign has said any of these things.

I can quote Obama on one thing I remember he said just recently:

YOU CAN'T JUST MAKE THINGS UP!

Posted by: He who asserts must prove | September 16, 2008 8:19 PM | Report abuse

Obama. One Man Devolution. Back to the 60s.

Posted by: Biden Bin Hiden | September 16, 2008 8:19 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin- Super Chick

One Girl Revolution

Posted by: Sarah ScaresYah | September 16, 2008 8:17 PM | Report abuse

And how about McCain's disastrous proposals to make the health care crisis worse... (from the NY Times today)

OP-ED COLUMNIST
McCain’s Radical Agenda
By BOB HERBERT
Talk about a shock to the system. Has anyone bothered to notice the radical changes that John McCain and Sarah Palin are planning for the nation’s health insurance system?
These are changes that will set in motion nothing less than the dismantling of the employer-based coverage that protects most American families.
A study coming out Tuesday from scholars at Columbia, Harvard, Purdue and Michigan projects that 20 million Americans who have employment-based health insurance would lose it under the McCain plan.
There is nothing secret about Senator McCain’s far-reaching proposals, but they haven’t gotten much attention because the chatter in this campaign has mostly been about nonsense — lipstick, celebrities and “Drill, baby, drill!”
For starters, the McCain health plan would treat employer-paid health benefits as income that employees would have to pay taxes on.
“It means your employer is going to have to make an estimate on how much the employer is paying for health insurance on your behalf, and you are going to have to pay taxes on that money,” said Sherry Glied, an economist who chairs the Department of Health Policy and Management at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health.
Ms. Glied is one of the four scholars who have just completed an independent joint study of the plan. Their findings are being published on the Web site of the policy journal, Health Affairs.
According to the study: “The McCain plan will force millions of Americans into the weakest segment of the private insurance system — the nongroup market — where cost-sharing is high, covered services are limited and people will lose access to benefits they have now.”
The net effect of the plan, the study said, “almost certainly will be to increase family costs for medical care.”
Under the McCain plan (now the McCain-Palin plan) employees who continue to receive employer-paid health benefits would look at their pay stubs each week or each month and find that additional money had been withheld to cover the taxes on the value of their benefits.
While there might be less money in the paycheck, that would not be anything to worry about, according to Senator McCain. That’s because the government would be offering all taxpayers a refundable tax credit — $2,500 for a single worker and $5,000 per family — to be used “to help pay for your health care.”
You may think this is a good move or a bad one — but it’s a monumental change in the way health coverage would be provided to scores of millions of Americans. Why not more attention?
The whole idea of the McCain plan is to get families out of employer-paid health coverage and into the health insurance marketplace, where naked competition is supposed to take care of all ills. (We’re seeing in the Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch fiascos just how well the unfettered marketplace has been working.)
Taxing employer-paid health benefits is the first step in this transition, the equivalent of injecting poison into the system. It’s the beginning of the end.
When younger, healthier workers start seeing additional taxes taken out of their paychecks, some (perhaps many) will opt out of the employer-based plans — either to buy cheaper insurance on their own or to go without coverage.
That will leave employers with a pool of older, less healthy workers to cover. That coverage will necessarily be more expensive, which will encourage more and more employers to give up on the idea of providing coverage at all.
The upshot is that many more Americans — millions more — will find themselves on their own in the bewildering and often treacherous health insurance marketplace. As Senator McCain has said: “I believe the key to real reform is to restore control over our health care system to the patients themselves.”
Yet another radical element of McCain’s plan is his proposal to undermine state health insurance regulations by allowing consumers to buy insurance from sellers anywhere in the country. So a requirement in one state that insurers cover, for example, vaccinations, or annual physicals, or breast examinations, would essentially be meaningless.
In a refrain we’ve heard many times in recent years, Mr. McCain said he is committed to ridding the market of these “needless and costly” insurance regulations.
This entire McCain health insurance transformation is right out of the right-wing Republicans’ ideological playbook: fewer regulations; let the market decide; and send unsophisticated consumers into the crucible alone.
You would think that with some of the most venerable houses on Wall Street crumbling like sand castles right before our eyes, we’d be a little wary about spreading this toxic formula even further into the health care system.
But we’re not even paying much attention.

Posted by: gschwartz1 | September 16, 2008 8:17 PM | Report abuse

I just watched some wrinkly white haired dude on tv say that he has been on every committee overseeing the economic meltdown of the country. Then he says he knows how to fix it. What is wrong with this picture?
He needs to fix himself. John mccain is a dog chasing his tail. He is the problem not the solution. He should fire all his crooked friends and quit himself. John mccain needs to be fixed.

Posted by: seems to me | September 16, 2008 8:16 PM | Report abuse

Where has all the HOPE talk gone?
Long time after.
Where has all the CHANGE talk gone?
Long gone away.
Getting dirty in the gutter now. Sort of like a hog farmer - squeeling and all.
Game over. Advantage McCain/Palin.
Palin serving next.
Bush - Nobel Peace Prize 2030

Posted by: canamdutch | September 16, 2008 8:16 PM | Report abuse

"The mystery of why Obama has not gained a greater advantage on the economy remains. I asked a veteran Democrat about this on Monday. "It baffles me," he said."

LOOK AT HOW OBAMA SQUANDERS THE HISTORIC MONEY HE'S RAISED FROM DONORS & HAS TO GO OUT BEGGING FOR MORE.

HE SPENT $6 MILLION JUST TO MOVE HIS ACCEPTANCE SPEECH TO MILE-HIGH STADIUM ONTO THAT SPECIAL-BUILT GREEK TEMPLE STAGE.

HE'S BLOWN THROUGH A SHOCKING, UNPRECEDENTED $400 MILLION DOLLARS IN A YEAR OF INCREDIBLE DEMOCRATIC ADVANTAGE, AND HE'S STILL BEHIND. HE'S BLOWN THRU HIS DONOR'S HISTORIC GIVING, AND IS IN BEVERLY HILLS TONIGHT PUMPING SOME MOVIE STARS AND MOGULS FOR MORE.

WHAT WILL HE DO IF GIVEN THE KEYS TO THE TREASURY & CHARGE OVER THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE?

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 16, 2008 8:14 PM | Report abuse

"The Wall Street reactionaries are not satisfied with being rich. They want to increase their power and their privileges, regardless of what happens to the other fellow. They are gluttons of privilege."

"These gluttons of privilege are now putting up fabulous sums of money to elect a Republican administration."

"Republican reactionaries want an administration that will assure privilege for big business, regardless of what may happen to the rest of the Nation."

Harry S Truman

Posted by: Harry S Truman | September 16, 2008 8:14 PM | Report abuse

Loup-bouc: something else occured to me. Your rant about grammer and how proper speaking equates to proper thinking and vice versa struck me as an elitist barb. Are you one of those liberal elitist I keep hearing about?

Posted by: I talk good | September 16, 2008 8:12 PM | Report abuse

LOOK AT HOW OBAMA SQUANDERS THE HISTORIC MONEY HE'S RAISED FROM DONORS & HAS TO GO OUT BEGGING FOR MORE.

HE SPENT $6 MILLION JUST TO MOVE HIS ACCEPTANCE SPEECH TO MILE-HIGH STADIUM ONTO THAT SPECIAL-BUILT GREEK TEMPLE STAGE.

HE'S BLOWN THROUGH A SHOCKING, UNPRECEDENTED $400 MILLION DOLLARS IN A YEAR OF INCREDIBLE DEMOCRATIC ADVANTAGE, AND HE'S STILL BEHIND. HE'S BLOWN THRU HIS DONOR'S HISTORIC GIVING, AND IS IN BEVERLY HILLS TONIGHT PUMPING SOME MOVIE STARS AND MOGULS FOR MORE.

WHAT WILL HE DO IF GIVEN THEY KEYS TO THE TREASURY & CHARGE OVER THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE?

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 16, 2008 8:12 PM | Report abuse

The Supreme Court issue is mute

Republicans have already put enough judges on the court to
overturn Roe. So why hasn't it happened? Well for one
thing some of Republican appointees actually are objective
at adjudicating and interpreting the law. The liberal
Democrat appoointed judges are the more doctrinaire.
Most Republicans including myself think Roe should never have happened.
But the best that may happen is that it may eventually be returned to the states.

So what good is having a Republican in the White House?

Well, Democrats would like to force all hospitals including
christian affiliated ones to do abortions and other immoral
procedures if they accept Federal money.

Republicans will fight this.

Democrats don't mind if I take your daughter across
state lines to procure an abortion even without your
consent as a parent.

Republicans fight against this sort of thing.

I could go on....

Posted by: George | September 16, 2008 8:10 PM | Report abuse

it's too bad that Obama received the most money from Freddie and Fannie after Chris Dodd. and now he's trying to talk trash about lobbyists? and while obama was filing his pockets, john mccain was trying to pass the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, predicting what would happen, and trying to avoid this crash. of course the reform didn't pass, because of people like Obama.
this election is about self-service or public service. easy choice.

Posted by: eve | September 16, 2008 8:07 PM | Report abuse

OBAMA FEAR-MONGERS RE: STABILITY OF OUR ECONOMY WHILE HE'S
SPENDING HIS DONORS' HISTORIC GIVING IN AN OBSCENELY LAVISH WAY

McCain was saying necessary calming things when he said that the economy's fundamentals were strong, but the things he was saying were in fact true. Yesterday afternoon, Bloomberg came out and agreed with McCain's statement that the fundamentals of our economy are strong, and so have others.

All the real leaders were out yesterday making reassuring noises, which were true, by the way. Except Obama. Obama would rather go around hyping the fear and exaggerating the systemic seriousness of the problem. Only Obama was out yesterday shrilling fearful gloom-and-doom statements (that were exaggerations) hoping to capitalize on the Lehman bankruptcy to beat the bushes to drive up an economic-fear vote.

Finally, on the day that Obama releases an ad ridiculing John McCain's reassuring & accurate statement that the fundamentals of the economy are strong, and declaring that John McCain is wrong, that the economy is "broken", Obama is now flying off to feast and entertain with multimillionaires at a fundraiser with Barbera Streisand. Although Obama has raised breathtaking & historic campaign funds ($400 million so far?), he's also engaged in lavish and obscene spending. He spent $6 million alone to move his nomination acceptance speech to Mile-High stadium on that special-built temple-like stage. He's raised historic money, but he's also spent it in an unprecedented way. He needs every penny of the $10 million he's expected to make off his Hollywood backers tonight.

This is how a self-centered and narcissistic me-first politician wastes his donors' historic giving and then when he blows through that, goes out asking for more.

Wonder what he'd do if given the keys to the U.S Treasury and put in charge of the Internal Revenue Service and our economy.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 16, 2008 8:06 PM | Report abuse

http://www.michiganmessenger.com/4076/lose-your-house-lose-your-vote

Interesting article. I wonder if it is true and even if it is true, if anyone will pay attention to it.

Posted by: One House One Vote? | September 16, 2008 8:04 PM | Report abuse

"You are The Boss... which team would you hire?"

I'd hire whichever team didn't have Obama on it. He's nothing but a great big phony.

Posted by: bobbiewick | September 16, 2008 8:00 PM | Report abuse

Democrats - Marxist and socialist are descriptive terms and, under their classic definitions, all "Insane McCain" nitwits are Marxists and socialists. McCain is a NeoCon, a "free traitor", a globalization fool, a fuzzy monded one worlder, a classic communist. Please, use the term. It applies to the right wing posters here, it descxribes not only thewir core beliefs, but their treason.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 7:57 PM | Report abuse

Aspergirl is a Republican shill. Her comments are more likely thought up by Karl Rove than by anyone who ever supported Hillary or knows anything about Barack Obama.

Any woman who supported Hillary would be revolted by the prospect of Palin in the White House.

Anyone who knows Obama's positions on de-regulation of the financial markets knows that he has been right while McCain has been wrong.

I have yet to read anything by her that even made sense, let alone was true.

But I admit I haven't wasted my time reading all of her posts.

Posted by: ArmyBrat68 | September 16, 2008 7:57 PM | Report abuse

Obama needs to use this issue to force McCain into a corner and diminish some of the success based on artificial media coverage McCain has received. At the same time Obama needs to be more clear on exactly what he plans to do and how it will be better than McCain.

Posted by: wes rahn | September 16, 2008 7:56 PM | Report abuse

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/empathetic

Loup-bouc gives us a grammar lesson. Or is it a definition lesson? I am not sure. I guess it matters in the grand scheme of things, but to me "empathetic" and "empathic" seem to be the same damned word. Umm. Who cares?

And yeah, Loup, John McCain MUST have some level of empathy for the common person, so he must be SLIGHTLY "attuned". Presumably this means you may grant permission to the use of the expression "more attuned"?

And before you jump on that questionmark dangling outside the quote mark, be aware that I do that on purpose just to piss the grammar-nazis off. Knock yerself out, dood.

We now return to the issues.

Posted by: I talk good | September 16, 2008 7:55 PM | Report abuse

McCain called for a national commission to study what went wrong on Wall Street and recommend a new regulatory structure "so this never, ever happens again," ... "And as president, I guarantee you, it will never happen again."
"I promise you that on my watch, we are never going to let these kinds of abuses go uncorrected or unpunished," There he goes again, making guarantees and promises saying "never." He & Cindy lied about their ages when they met. Senator McCain, how about a reality check?

Posted by: jaba1 | September 16, 2008 7:55 PM | Report abuse

Patty2008,

You call me a "Creeping Socialism Marxist Liberal Democrat Empty Suits Liars". I call myself an intelligent American woman with a husband in Iraq that can plainly see that Obama is the better choice for our nation and our children. Stop with the hate. The first step is admitting that you have a problem.

Posted by: No More Labels | September 16, 2008 7:53 PM | Report abuse

Most people are REALLY just starting to pay attention to the candidates, and Mc Goo is losing ground fast, along with his trailer trash VP.

When Mc Cain says that the economy is fundamentally sound this Monday, Mr. I-Cant-Remember_How-Many-Houses-I-Have looks like exactly what America doesn't need.

Mc Cain is also the guy whose campaign is run by lobbyists such as Phil Gramm (who wrote many of the laws that allowed banks to run wild before they crashed), and who thinks that you're not rich until you've got $5 million. He's beholden to bog oil, and both he and his clueless VP have been caught in lie after lie after lie.

OBAMA/BIDEN '08!

Posted by: LH | September 16, 2008 7:52 PM | Report abuse

ArmyBrrat68 - John and similar minded right wing attack dogs will earn this years Darwin Award if they do elect John McCain. McCain has sworn to continue the free trade policies that have sunk Wall Street and cost blithering idiots like John their jobs. So, either way we win. Ether Obama is elected and we have a chace to undo the free trade-globalization onsense of this current crop of GOP Marxists or McCain wins and John and his brats starve to death.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 7:51 PM | Report abuse

Nothing unexpected about this. If you could see Ike and Katrina coming, you could see the newest greedfest coming to a crash if you were paying attention AT ALL. McSame is NOT a maverick, nor is he shrewd. If you would try to do your job instead of pushing narratives and being a mf'er (media filter) for the right, disdain would not have to drip from these comment boards.

of course, they pay kudlow and paulson, so wapo paying you should not be a surprise and will be part of the reason this rag will not exist in the same form this time next year.

Being a maverick means never having to tell the truth.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 7:50 PM | Report abuse

Obama belongs to the same snot nosed Ivy League crowd that brought us this financial mess...
Posted by: John

----

That is the opposite of the truth. Mr. Obama has opposed the de-regulation of financial markets and other Bush policies that have caused the current crises. He was just praised for doing so on MSNBC.

Mr. McCain went along with them like the rest of his party. As McCain admits - he doesn't know much about economics. And his advisors are apparently pretty bad, too.

Posted by: ArmyBrrat68 | September 16, 2008 7:47 PM | Report abuse

Dan Balz wrote: "Polls show the public already believes Obama is the more empathetic of the two candidates and more attuned to their everyday problems...."

The word is empathic, not empathetic. Compare preventive (correct and logical) versus preventative (incorrect, illogical, and stupidly pretentious, as if the verb were “preventate” and better because bigger and latinate-seeming). Or does Mr. Balz attribute to Obama a strange newly discovered human psychological quality, the quality "empathety."

Also, the clause "and more attuned to their everyday problems" is redundant. Its idea is implicit in "the more empathetic" (or "the more empathic"). And is McCain attuned to ANY degree? If, as appears, McCain is not attuned, then “the more” is redundant even WITHIN its clause.

The above-quoted Balz language suffers other linguistic/logic troubles. But I'm getting bored; so I'll not expose more (like the problems of “already believes” and “of the two candidates”).

Journalistic writing began declining when journalism began to follow "drift grammar” or "drift usage linguistics" and began using, per drift "rule," ambiguous forms like split infinitives and three-or-more-item series not punctuated with a comma placed before the conjunction preceding the last item.

What one states is exactly what one thinks, as what one thinks is exactly what one states. So, drift usage makes sloppy thought, like Mr. Balz's.

Posted by: Loup-bouc | September 16, 2008 7:47 PM | Report abuse

Marxists? Socialists?

1992-2000:

WHAT are you guys talking about.
DEMOCRATS brought the 8 most Economically Succesful years, in 40 years, to this country (1992-2000)

WHAT are you guys talking about.
DEMOCRATS brought the 8 most Economically Succesful years, in 40 years, to this country (1992-2000)

GOP supporters, I know Gimmicks and name-calling is often what you resort to - but just so you know, not everyone here is as desperate.

Posted by: Democrats | September 16, 2008 7:46 PM | Report abuse

This is why Obama thinks there are 57 states in our union:
The Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) is an international organization with a permanent delegation to the United Nations. It groups 57 member states, from the Middle East, Africa, Central Asia, Caucasus, Balkan, Southeast Asia, South Asia and South America. The official languages of the organization are Arabic, English and French. You can put a Muslim in the White House, if you're that dumb.
From Audacity of Hope:'I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.'
Not to mention his admitted Muslim faith comment on national TV...

Posted by: Don | September 16, 2008 7:46 PM | Report abuse

For all to read: AN ALL STATES ALERT! Please go to www.michiganmessenger.com The Republicans are at it again this election. They are trying to prevent voters in Michigan whose homes are in foreclosure from voting. This is amazing what they will do to win.

If your, or someone you know, home is in foreclosure get the message to them. We can beat them at their own game.

Posted by: Bea | September 16, 2008 7:45 PM | Report abuse

FREE MARKET v. FREE LICENSE

"This is what happens when you confuse the 'Free Market' with a 'Free License' to let special interests take whatever they can get."

- Barack OBAMA: Golden, Colorado. Sept. 16, 2008

Posted by: FREE v. FREE | September 16, 2008 7:42 PM | Report abuse

Every 4 years the Republicans take their outworn, discredited philosophy and dress it up in a new disguise--and try to sell it to the American people. They try to convince the people it's been made over into something different.

This year, they tried to clothe it in the shining armor of a national hero. But before the campaign has ended, each 4 years, the new disguise wears mighty thin. In fact, you can see through it, and you can see that nothing's changed. This year, I fear that the disguise came off even sooner than usual.

Harry S Truman
October 6, 1952

Posted by: Harry S Truman | September 16, 2008 7:35 PM | Report abuse

Palin's churches and the Third Wave- a MUST see video!
http://vimeo.com/1679097?pg=embed&sec=1679097

Posted by: grdn_nell | September 16, 2008 7:33 PM | Report abuse

My girlfriends and I have switched our vote to McCain. We are excited at the prospect of having a woman VP.

Posted by: Suzy | September 16, 2008 7:32 PM | Report abuse

Patty 2008 - Marxists? Really? Look, Patty, the entire foundation of NeoConservsativism is based on Marxism. The Wall Street crowd, Bush, and McCain are the current "fuzzy mind one worlders" who support globalization, welfare (for the rich), and "free trade" - meaning they trade your job off to India or China to buy support for their latest foreign policy insanity. You want Marxists? The GOP's got 'em. The offspring of Stalin, Lenin and Karl Marx is alive and well and is asking you to sell out your country by voting for John McCain.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 7:29 PM | Report abuse

What a great irony it is to know that 1/2 the Obama supporters will vote for McCain once inside the confines of the voting booth. (The Bradley Effect is REAL)

Posted by: ClintonDem4Cynthia08 | September 16, 2008 7:27 PM | Report abuse

Obama belongs to the same snot nosed Ivy League crowd that brought us this financial mess. The last thing we need is one of those argula chompers in the White House.

Posted by: John | September 16, 2008 7:26 PM | Report abuse

Aspergirl only pretends to be a Democrat; although she might be some sort of misguided right wing feminist (ala Palin) who toyed with voting for Clinton. She is a low life racist who posts under a variety of names. Some of her comments are enough to make you vomit. Most of us think she is one of McCain paid bloggers, although she has claimed to be Wall Street broker or something like it. Just ignore her and she will go away.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 7:24 PM | Report abuse

has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.

According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July.

“He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington,” Zebari said in an interview.

Obama assumed authority not conveyed to him by the American public, and directly attempted to subvert the efforts of the current US Administration. He violated the Logan Act

Obama’s audacity is frightening. On what authority did he believe it was okay to seek to undermine the Bush Administration’s work with the Iraqi Government to end the US war?

Not only did Obama directly and blatantly LIE to the American people — he has committed a CRIME. And he must step down NOW.

Obama’s violation of the Logan Act is so blatant, I can’t understand why the Federal Government hasn’t prosecuted. Is it perhaps because they are afraid of being called racist? Or is it because since it is a Republican administration they are afraid of being called unfair to a Democrat?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 7:22 PM | Report abuse

What a great day on the campaign trail for the McCain/Zero ticket.

First he tried to re-spin the "fundamentally sound" as a reference to American workers....sure. Just like the previous 16 times you said it? Same thing?

Second, he called for the creation of a "commission" to study this financial disaster. Man of action? You must be kidding. Of course, in yet another give-us-12-hours-to-re-spin-this-operation, they decided that a "commission would let outside experts get involved.." Oh ya...the "commission." That's quite the "maverick move."

Third, his complete hack financial handler (I know him, he is a nobody) decided to drop to a knee and thank God in heaven that John McCain invented the Blackberry. And, again, in the post-moron-moment-spin, they said he was "just kidding..." No, he wasn't.

Fourth, Carly "Cash Out" Fiorina said that Zero wasn't quailfied to run a major corporation. Then, in the third re-spin of the day, she said McCain couldn't either.

Fifth, Zero spoke from a teleprompter, and, when the tired, crankly old "maverick" came to the microphone, the crowd started to leave. (But, on a good note, the McCain Campaign said 3.23 million people attended the rally.

Great job, Shultzie, great job.

Posted by: Losercuda | September 16, 2008 7:21 PM | Report abuse

So give it up you Creeping Socialism Marxist Liberal Democrat Empty Suits Liars
Messiah Barack Hussein Obama and Motor Mouth Phony Joe Biden and just Accept that
you already lost Election 2008 and that
the 44th President is John McCain and Gov
Sarah Palin is Vice President,since the
American Voters will Never vote for your
phony "Womb To The Tomb Creeping Socialism"
Obama and Biden and Chairman of the Demcrat
Cluture of Corruption Madame Speaker Nutsie
Nancy Pelosi,and empty your desks as your
all also going to jail for it as well.

Go President John McCain and Vice President
Sarah Barracuda Palin send Obama,Biden,
Pelosi,Reid and these Pinko Socialist Democrat Culture of Corruption off to jail.

Another Independent Voter For McCain/Palin

Posted by: Patty 2008 | September 16, 2008 7:18 PM | Report abuse

John McCain says what he meant when he said economic fundamentals are sound is that the American worker is sound. Well, we all know that is B.S. McCain has made the statement at least 16 times previously, and has never lauded the American worker. His reference to economic fundamentals was to the classic statistical indicators of the state of the economy, e.g., inflation rate. In spite of this, one has to take what one can get. It is thrilling to hear a proponent of unregulated capitalism, free markets (at the expense of American workers losing jobs overseas), etc. come to the realization that it is labor that underpins the economy, i.e., the economic health of the nation depends on loyal, productive workers. Wow! McCain has become a proponent of the Labor Theory of Value, i.e., simply put, a value of a product depends on the labor put into it. One waits in pensive anticipation to see what other Marxist economic theories he embraces. Who says you can't teach an old dog new tricks.

Posted by: ChuckB | September 16, 2008 7:17 PM | Report abuse

I have been in this country for 7 years and when I arrived I was struck at how poor and uneducated most blacks are. I could never figure out why most had children out of wedlock, sold drugs, and were in jail. They even have the highest rate of HIV.

I suppose it is the slave metality from generations ago but at some point they will have to take responsibility. I think that is the reason Senator Obama appeals to so many whites because he isn't 100% black. He has a black face but the mentality of a white person. That makes the vote palatable and they can feel good about themselves. I doubt many of these white voters would go for an Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson - just too black and they are for more representative of the black American - not Barack Obama.

Posted by: Rahiq Syed | September 16, 2008 7:17 PM | Report abuse

McCain gained on the economy question for one reason: his drill, baby, drill message. He's wrong, but the low info voters saw something they liked. Fat Cat Fiorina and Greedy Gramm are his friends, so wait for the public to catch up. There's still time.

Posted by: DemoDevil | September 16, 2008 7:14 PM | Report abuse

I don't think the recent economic situation is good news for Obama, or anybody. It only makes the situation tougher for everyone in our economy, which seems to be built on an unstable foundation of debt. It is a bigger problem than who wins the presidential campaign. If McCain wins, fine, let him continue the hands-off, anything-goes policies of the Bush administration. At some point in America's future the federal government will need to take the economy seriously, and acting in the national interest, instead of thinking along partisan lines. And if Republicans and conservatives can't handle regulation, and law and order, they can go to Mexico, South America, and whereever else American jobs are getting exported.

Posted by: John C | September 16, 2008 7:08 PM | Report abuse

LOOK AT THE PARTY OF GOD... JUST A BUNCH OF LIARS!! Republicans WHAT A F-ING JOKE OF A PARTY...

JUNEAU, Alaska - Alaska's investigation into whether Gov. Sarah Palin abused her power, a potentially damaging distraction for John McCain's presidential campaign, ran into intensified resistance Tuesday from state Republican lawmakers who want to end it or delay it past the election.

Alaska's House speaker, a Republican who supported the "Troopergate" investigation two months ago, openly questioned its impartiality and raised the possibility of delaying the findings.

The surprise maneuver by Rep. John Harris reflected deepening resolve by Republicans to spare Palin embarassment or worse in the final weeks of the presidential campaign.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA

PRESIDENT OBAMA!!

Prisoner Palin!

I got S H I T in my diaper again McCain.

Posted by: 1-20-09 | September 16, 2008 7:05 PM | Report abuse

WP, your blog technology sucks! Why don't you hire some teenagers to fix it?

Posted by: Caronte | September 16, 2008 7:04 PM | Report abuse

The underlying differences between the Republican and Democratic Parties boils down to a very simple thing. The Republicans believe that the power of the Government should be used, first of all, to help the rich and privileged people of this country. With them property comes first. The Democrats believe that the powers of the Government should be used to give the common man some protection, and a chance to make a decent living. With the Democrats the people come first.

The Democratic Party is a political organization that has a heart--it cares about the people--it cares about all the people, rich and poor alike. The Republican Party is ruled by a little group of men who have calculating machines where their hearts ought to be.

Sometimes the Republicans aid their clientele by special favors--like the rich man's tax cut bill which was passed by the 80th Congress over my veto--or like their attempts to give away the Nation's oil resources to all the big oil interests.

Sometimes the Republicans aid their special friends by doing nothing--by a philosophy of each man for himself and the devil take the hindmost. That's why they've fought such measures as minimum wage laws, social security, and the protection of the right of labor unions to organize. All these things and others like them have been opposed by the Republicans.

Harry S Truman
October 6, 1952

(sorry if this is posted multiple times)

Posted by: Harry S Truman | September 16, 2008 7:04 PM | Report abuse

Patrick, wrap your mind around the F A C T that the person who occupies the office of the Presidency is only one out of a multitude of factors that effect the economy on a daily, ever-changing basis.

The President's dictates have little to do with the key indices of economic stability.

Take a basic economics course.

Posted by: SPM MD | September 16, 2008 7:01 PM | Report abuse

Aspergirl what are you talking about! You are not punishing Obama I've you don't vote for him. Heck he will survive this mess. Remember he has credentials alot higher than yours as judging my your post. You are and narrow minded people like you are hurting your children, and helping disgrace this country in the eyes of the world that all. No Obama isn't perfect heck no! but to vote for McShame/Palin is a very ignornat! ignorant! ignorant! thing to do! He is the best chance we have go to get out this economic mess. Palin is clueless!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!against everything that progressive women have stood for. I don't know about you but I am tired of idiots runnning Washington. And specifically the Republican party, and every idiot that subscribes to it that includes McCain!

Posted by: Hope | September 16, 2008 7:01 PM | Report abuse

Aspergirl what are you talking about! You are not punishing Obama I've you don't vote for him. Heck he will survive this mess. Remember he has credentials alot higher than yours as judging my your post. You are and narrow minded people like you are hurting your children, and helping disgrace this country in the eyes of the world that all. No Obama isn't perfect heck no! but to vote for McShame/Palin is a very ignornat! ignorant! ignorant! thing to do! He is the best chance we have go to get out this economic mess. Palin is clueless!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!against everything that progressive women have stood for. I don't know about you but I am tired of idiots runnning Washington. And specifically the Republican party, and every idiot that subscribes to it that includes McCain!

Posted by: Hope | September 16, 2008 7:01 PM | Report abuse

"Democrats on Capitol Hill fear Obama fallout"

By Andrew Ward in Washington
Published: September 11 2008 23:30 | Last updated: September 11 2008 23:30

"Democratic jitters about the US presidential race have spread to Capitol Hill, where some members of Congress are worried that Barack Obama’s faltering campaign could hurt their chances of re-election. There is a growing sense of doom among Democrats I have spoken to...Republicans have been on the offensive for the past two weeks. You don’t win elections on the defensive."

===============
The D-crats are beginning to realize that, by once again giving in to the ultra-liberal loony-left, they have made a horribly wrong choice for their candidate. The stench of fear and desperation are now permeating the d-crat campaign, and the sense of impending doom and defeat has completely overcome the "yes we can" BS. Even the Styrofoam Greek Temple of the Gods is starting to crumble!

As more and more voters compare the Real American candidates with "sweetie" hussein and plagiarist-joe, the latter will, like the d-crat's previous elitist, pompous gas-bag candidate kerry and adulterer edwards, just deflate and blow away.

Good for America!

Posted by: ALEX H. | September 16, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

"Democrats on Capitol Hill fear Obama fallout"

By Andrew Ward in Washington
Published: September 11 2008 23:30 | Last updated: September 11 2008 23:30

"Democratic jitters about the US presidential race have spread to Capitol Hill, where some members of Congress are worried that Barack Obama’s faltering campaign could hurt their chances of re-election. There is a growing sense of doom among Democrats I have spoken to...Republicans have been on the offensive for the past two weeks. You don’t win elections on the defensive."

===============
The D-crats are beginning to realize that, by once again giving in to the ultra-liberal loony-left, they have made a horribly wrong choice for their candidate. The stench of fear and desperation are now permeating the d-crat campaign, and the sense of impending doom and defeat has completely overcome the "yes we can" BS. Even the Styrofoam Greek Temple of the Gods is starting to crumble!

As more and more voters compare the Real American candidates with "sweetie" hussein and plagiarist-joe, the latter will, like the d-crat's previous elitist, pompous gas-bag candidate kerry and adulterer edwards, just deflate and blow away.

Good for America!

Posted by: ALEX H | September 16, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

"Democrats on Capitol Hill fear Obama fallout"

By Andrew Ward in Washington
Published: September 11 2008 23:30 | Last updated: September 11 2008 23:30

"Democratic jitters about the US presidential race have spread to Capitol Hill, where some members of Congress are worried that Barack Obama’s faltering campaign could hurt their chances of re-election. There is a growing sense of doom among Democrats I have spoken to...Republicans have been on the offensive for the past two weeks. You don’t win elections on the defensive."

===============
The D-crats are beginning to realize that, by once again giving in to the ultra-liberal loony-left, they have made a horribly wrong choice for their candidate. The stench of fear and desperation are now permeating the d-crat campaign, and the sense of impending doom and defeat has completely overcome the "yes we can" BS. Even the Styrofoam Greek Temple of the Gods is starting to crumble!

As more and more voters compare the Real American candidates with "sweetie" hussein and plagiarist-joe, the latter will, like the d-crat's previous elitist, pompous gas-bag candidate kerry and adulterer edwards, just deflate and blow away.

Good for America!

Posted by: MENTAL | September 16, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

Okay, apologies - looks like I'm not the only one who kept clicking the "submit" button over and over again because the browser stalled.

Posted by: treetopflyer | September 16, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

"Democrats on Capitol Hill fear Obama fallout"

By Andrew Ward in Washington
Published: September 11 2008 23:30 | Last updated: September 11 2008 23:30

"Democratic jitters about the US presidential race have spread to Capitol Hill, where some members of Congress are worried that Barack Obama’s faltering campaign could hurt their chances of re-election. There is a growing sense of doom among Democrats I have spoken to...Republicans have been on the offensive for the past two weeks. You don’t win elections on the defensive."

===============
The D-crats are beginning to realize that, by once again giving in to the ultra-liberal loony-left, they have made a horribly wrong choice for their candidate. The stench of fear and desperation are now permeating the d-crat campaign, and the sense of impending doom and defeat has completely overcome the "yes we can" BS. Even the Styrofoam Greek Temple of the Gods is starting to crumble!

As more and more voters compare the Real American candidates with "sweetie" hussein and plagiarist-joe, the latter will, like the d-crat's previous elitist, pompous gas-bag candidate kerry and adulterer edwards, just deflate and blow away.

Good for America!

Posted by: ALEX H. | September 16, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

An anonymous poster made reference to the last Great Depression (we may start numbering them soon).

Harry Truman made reference to it as well. Here's what he said:
=======================================
"That is what happened in the 1920's, under the big business rule of the Republicans. Those were the days when big corporations had things their own way. The policies that Wall Street big business wanted were the policies that the Republicans adopted. Agriculture, labor, and small business played second fiddle, while big business called the tune."

...

"You remember the results of that Wall Street Republican policy. You remember the big boom and the great crash of 1929. You remember that in 1932 the position of the farmer had become so desperate that there was actual violence in many farming communities. You remember that insurance companies and banks took over much of the land of small independent farmers--223,000 farmers lost their farms."

"That was a painful lesson. It should not be forgotten for a moment."

"Since then the farmer has come a long way. The agricultural program of the Democratic administration in 16 years has enabled farmers to attain decent standards of living. Interest rates on farm credit have been sharply brought down. Farm mortgage indebtedness has been reduced by more than 50 percent. Farm mortgage foreclosures have almost disappeared. In 1947 the smallest number of farm foreclosures in the history of the country took place."

"All this was done under a Democratic administration."

...

"The Wall Street reactionaries are not satisfied with being rich. They want to increase their power and their privileges, regardless of what happens to the other fellow. They are gluttons of privilege."

"These gluttons of privilege are now putting up fabulous sums of money to elect a Republican administration."

"Why do you think they are doing that? For the love of the Republican candidate? Or do you think it is because they expect a Republican administration to carry out their will, as it did in the days of Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover?"

"I think we know the answer. I think we know that Wall Street expects its money this year to elect a Republican administration that will listen to the gluttons of privilege first, and to the people not at all."

"Republican reactionaries want an administration that will assure privilege for big business, regardless of what may happen to the rest of the Nation."

...

"To gain this end, they will stop at nothing. On the one hand, the Republicans are telling industrial workers that the high cost of food in the cities is due to this Government's farm policy. On the other hand, the Republicans are telling the farmers that the high cost of manufactured goods on the farm is due to this Government's labor policy."

"That's plain hokum. It's an old political trick. "If you can't convince 'em, confuse 'era." But this time it won't work."

---Harry S. Truman, Dexter, Iowa, Sept 18, 1948
http://trumanlibrary.org/publicpapers/index.php?pid=1814
=======================================

It turned out Truman was right and it didn't work in the 1948 elections, but it may well work for this election. Things have changed since the 1940s, and the mass-media corporate controlled televison stations saturate the public with lies. They may be fooled by these lies.

God help us all.

Posted by: wunderwood | September 16, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

"Democrats on Capitol Hill fear Obama fallout"

By Andrew Ward in Washington
Published: September 11 2008 23:30 | Last updated: September 11 2008 23:30

"Democratic jitters about the US presidential race have spread to Capitol Hill, where some members of Congress are worried that Barack Obama’s faltering campaign could hurt their chances of re-election. There is a growing sense of doom among Democrats I have spoken to...Republicans have been on the offensive for the past two weeks. You don’t win elections on the defensive."

===============
The D-crats are beginning to realize that, by once again giving in to the ultra-liberal loony-left, they have made a horribly wrong choice for their candidate. The stench of fear and desperation are now permeating the d-crat campaign, and the sense of impending doom and defeat has completely overcome the "yes we can" BS. Even the Styrofoam Greek Temple of the Gods is starting to crumble!

As more and more voters compare the Real American candidates with "sweetie" hussein and plagiarist-joe, the latter will, like the d-crat's previous elitist, pompous gas-bag candidate kerry and adulterer edwards, just deflate and blow away.

Good for America!

Posted by: MENTAL | September 16, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

An anonymous poster made reference to the last Great Depression (we may start numbering them soon).

Harry Truman made reference to it as well. Here's what he said:
=======================================
"That is what happened in the 1920's, under the big business rule of the Republicans. Those were the days when big corporations had things their own way. The policies that Wall Street big business wanted were the policies that the Republicans adopted. Agriculture, labor, and small business played second fiddle, while big business called the tune."

...

"You remember the results of that Wall Street Republican policy. You remember the big boom and the great crash of 1929. You remember that in 1932 the position of the farmer had become so desperate that there was actual violence in many farming communities. You remember that insurance companies and banks took over much of the land of small independent farmers--223,000 farmers lost their farms."

"That was a painful lesson. It should not be forgotten for a moment."

"Since then the farmer has come a long way. The agricultural program of the Democratic administration in 16 years has enabled farmers to attain decent standards of living. Interest rates on farm credit have been sharply brought down. Farm mortgage indebtedness has been reduced by more than 50 percent. Farm mortgage foreclosures have almost disappeared. In 1947 the smallest number of farm foreclosures in the history of the country took place."

"All this was done under a Democratic administration."

...

"The Wall Street reactionaries are not satisfied with being rich. They want to increase their power and their privileges, regardless of what happens to the other fellow. They are gluttons of privilege."

"These gluttons of privilege are now putting up fabulous sums of money to elect a Republican administration."

"Why do you think they are doing that? For the love of the Republican candidate? Or do you think it is because they expect a Republican administration to carry out their will, as it did in the days of Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover?"

"I think we know the answer. I think we know that Wall Street expects its money this year to elect a Republican administration that will listen to the gluttons of privilege first, and to the people not at all."

"Republican reactionaries want an administration that will assure privilege for big business, regardless of what may happen to the rest of the Nation."

...

"To gain this end, they will stop at nothing. On the one hand, the Republicans are telling industrial workers that the high cost of food in the cities is due to this Government's farm policy. On the other hand, the Republicans are telling the farmers that the high cost of manufactured goods on the farm is due to this Government's labor policy."

"That's plain hokum. It's an old political trick. "If you can't convince 'em, confuse 'era." But this time it won't work."

---Harry S. Truman, Dexter, Iowa, Sept 18, 1948
http://trumanlibrary.org/publicpapers/index.php?pid=1814
=======================================

It turned out Truman was right and it didn't work in the 1948 elections, but it may well work for this election. Things have changed since the 1940s, and the mass-media corporate controlled televison stations saturate the public with lies. They may be fooled by these lies.

God help us all.

Posted by: wunderwood | September 16, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

"Democrats on Capitol Hill fear Obama fallout"

By Andrew Ward in Washington
Published: September 11 2008 23:30 | Last updated: September 11 2008 23:30

"Democratic jitters about the US presidential race have spread to Capitol Hill, where some members of Congress are worried that Barack Obama’s faltering campaign could hurt their chances of re-election. There is a growing sense of doom among Democrats I have spoken to...Republicans have been on the offensive for the past two weeks. You don’t win elections on the defensive."

===============
The D-crats are beginning to realize that, by once again giving in to the ultra-liberal loony-left, they have made a horribly wrong choice for their candidate. The stench of fear and desperation are now permeating the d-crat campaign, and the sense of impending doom and defeat has completely overcome the "yes we can" BS. Even the Styrofoam Greek Temple of the Gods is starting to crumble!

As more and more voters compare the Real American candidates with "sweetie" hussein and plagiarist-joe, the latter will, like the d-crat's previous elitist, pompous gas-bag candidate kerry and adulterer edwards, just deflate and blow away.

Good for America!

Posted by: ImpeachNOW | September 16, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

The underlying differences between the Republican and Democratic Parties boils down to a very simple thing. The Republicans believe that the power of the Government should be used, first of all, to help the rich and privileged people of this country. With them property comes first. The Democrats believe that the powers of the Government should be used to give the common man some protection, and a chance to make a decent living. With the Democrats the people come first.

The Democratic Party is a political organization that has a heart--it cares about the people--it cares about all the people, rich and poor alike. The Republican Party is ruled by a little group of men who have calculating machines where their hearts ought to be.

Sometimes the Republicans aid their clientele by special favors--like the rich man's tax cut bill which was passed by the 80th Congress over my veto--or like their attempts to give away the Nation's oil resources to all the big oil interests.

Sometimes the Republicans aid their special friends by doing nothing--by a philosophy of each man for himself and the devil take the hindmost. That's why they've fought such measures as minimum wage laws, social security, and the protection of the right of labor unions to organize. All these things and others like them have been opposed by the Republicans. All of them have been supported and put through the Congress by such Democrats as your former Senator and my good friend Elbert Thomas.

The Republican philosophy is really something for you young people to ponder. If you were leaving college in a Republican world, where it was every man for himself, some few of you might do very well. You might get rich. But the devil would take an awful lot of you who happened to be the hindmost--or even in between.

Harry S Truman
October 6, 1952

Posted by: Republicans & Democrats | September 16, 2008 6:59 PM | Report abuse

Note that Obama is using a teleprompter again and on the campaign trail. This guy is a dud unless he is reading words that someone smarter than he writes for him. The entire period in which his fans made him a rock star was one based on his reading speeches. He does not think well on his feet and has little knowledge to fall back on when he is forced to speak extemporaneously. It is no wonder that Obama refused to participate with John McCain in that series of town meetings. McCain would have embarassed him.

Posted by: mhr | September 16, 2008 6:59 PM | Report abuse


To regain momentum, I'm having a fundraiser in Hollywood and Barbra Streisand is going to sing!!!

And Chevy Chase is f'ing Matt Damon!!!!


Posted by: Barack Obama | September 16, 2008 6:59 PM | Report abuse

Never underestimate the power of real-world events to impact the Presidential campaign. Those looking for a game-changing event may have found it in the events of the past three days, which have encompassed the financial collapse of two prominent Wall Street investment houses, a stock market plunge, and the candidates' responses to those events.

McCain's dual missteps of characterizing the economy as "fundamentally sound" and of suggesting the need for a 9/11-type study commission into this financial/commercial morass rather than a plan for immediate and consequential action upon assuming office, have presented Obama with the golden opportunity to hammer him as "out of touch" and confused.

Obama needs to hang onto the economic issue, and not let it go. Each day, more hammering at McCain, while also continuing to illuminate how he (Obama) will fix the system and reinvigorate the economy. If Obama successfully sustains the economy, the Republican economic policy failures of recent years, and McCain's lack of comprehension of the breadth and depth of the problems as the defining elements of the campaign, this race could wind up being a substantial Democratic victory, up and down the ticket.

The hand-wringers within the Democratic establishment can start to relax now, because the race has shifted to real issues which will deprive the Republicans of their opportunity to run a Culture War-type race as they so desperately desire to do.

This election will wind up being 1980 in reverse. The country is clearly headed in the wrong direction and voters recognize this to an overwhelming extent, just as in 1980, with this being a change election. Change elections require the ousting of the incumbent party. Re-electing the "in" party even if it's a different Republican face when the Republicans have gotten us into this mess is not going to solve the widespread economic problems the U.S. faces. 1980 was a pro-Republican change election, just as 2008 will be a pro-Democratic change election. The recent events provide Democrats the opportunity to focus the race on economic policy and the Republican record of economic failure. By the time we reach election day, the polls won't even be close. Look for the economy to also impact Congressional races. We could see a Democratic tidal wave as in 2006.

Posted by: OHIO CITIZEN | September 16, 2008 6:59 PM | Report abuse

Gee Patrick thanks for the amazing insight into the "best economic presidencies" since WWII.
Unfortunately, you failed to note that Johnson GAVE US VIETNAM!!!
Therefore, according to you "logic" we should vote McCain to get us out of our current Vietnam.
Oh BTW, Vietnam helped dump the U.S. economy because it was financed on the backs of future taxpayers. Perhaps you should have thought about that economic issue before parading your "info."

Posted by: Tony S. | September 16, 2008 6:59 PM | Report abuse

Note that Obama is using a teleprompter again and on the campaign trail. This guy is a dud unless he is reading words that someone smarter than he writes for him. The entire period in which his fans made him a rock star was one based on his reading speeches. He does not think well on his feet and has little knowledge to fall back on when he is forced to speak extemporaneously. It is no wonder that Obama refused to participate with John McCain in that series of town meetings. McCain would have embarassed him.

Posted by: mhr | September 16, 2008 6:59 PM | Report abuse

Note that Obama is using a teleprompter again and on the campaign trail. This guy is a dud unless he is reading words that someone smarter than he writes for him. The entire period in which his fans made him a rock star was one based on his reading speeches. He does not think well on his feet and has little knowledge to fall back on when he is forced to speak extemporaneously. It is no wonder that Obama refused to participate with John McCain in that series of town meetings. McCain would have embarassed him.

Posted by: mhr | September 16, 2008 6:59 PM | Report abuse

Gee Patrick thanks for the amazing insight into the "best economic presidencies" since WWII.
Unfortunately, you failed to note that Johnson GAVE US VIETNAM!!!
Therefore, according to your "logic" we should vote McCain to get us out of our current Vietnam.
Oh BTW, Vietnam helped dump the U.S. economy because it was financed on the backs of future taxpayers. Perhaps you should have thought about that economic issue before parading your "info."

Posted by: Tony S. | September 16, 2008 6:59 PM | Report abuse

Wrap your minds around these F A C T S. Per Forbes magazine, the top 3 presidents in US, Post World War history, are all DEMS. Republicans FAIL. SIMPLE as that. Look at all the numbers. It’s astonishing.

Postwar Presidencies Ranked By Six Measures Of Economic Performance:

#1 Clinton #2 Johnson #3 Kennedy

Why on God's GREEN EARTH would you even consider electing A Republican considering the state our country is in? How many failed Republican administrations will it take before you realize you are consistently voting against your best interests.

John McCain, I AM NOT a Georgian, I AM AN AMERICAN. Start putting the interests of MY COUNTRY 1st!!!!

http://www.forbes.com/2004/07/20/cx_da_0720presidents.html

Posted by: Patrick | September 16, 2008 6:40 PM | Report abuse

McCain claims he comes out against "reckless conduct, corruption, and unbridled greed" that he said brought Wall Street to this crisis...

How do you reign in reckless conduct, corruption, and unbridled greed? YOU REGULATE THE INDUSTRY so that it cannot legally get out of control.

JOHN MCCAIN IS AGAINST REGULATION... SO... DOES ANYONE IN THEIR RIGHT MIND BELIEVE THAT HE WILL SOLVE THE PROBLEM? HE WILL MAKE THE PROBLEM WORSE!!!

Posted by: Todd | September 16, 2008 6:39 PM | Report abuse

McCain did an excellent job in his speech on economic crisis - calm / reassuring / confident

Obama did a horrible job in his speech on economic crisis - doom / gloom / failure /total collapse / The Great Depression.

The rookie Obama failed again in a crisis - using fear and putting panic in the hearts of America that could cause damage beyond repair - runs on banks.

OMG - please America see how Obama was acutally excited over the bad news - so he could use it to get elected - this man will destroy America for his own self interests.

Posted by: jlpIllinois | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

McCain did an excellent job in his speech on economic crisis - calm / reassuring / confident

Obama did a horrible job in his speech on economic crisis - doom / gloom / failure /total collapse / The Great Depression.

The rookie Obama failed again in a crisis - using fear and putting panic in the hearts of America that could cause damage beyond repair - runs on banks.

OMG - please America see how Obama was acutally excited over the bad news - so he could use it to get elected - this man will destroy America for his own self interests.

Posted by: jlpIllinois | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

What am I missing? Someone out there please tell me why the media continues to slobber all over itself for Obama?

Posted by: Allen | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

One question: If your pension was riding on its success and you could select either Senator Obama or Senator McCain to run a large international company, who would you select?

I'd select the Harvard Law Review president, too.

Please America, give us the same chance.

Posted by: amaikovich | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Obama is not a socialist...the closest thing to socialism that I see out there is the current adminstration deciding to take over Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and bailing out Bear Stearns.

Posted by: HESS
----------------------------------------------
That's not socialism - it's national socialism, otherwise known as fascim. The intricate merging of government and business interests. Look for the government takeover of Krupp Arms Works and IG Farben next week - you know, IG Farben, it's a gaz, gaz, gaz...

Posted by: treetopflyer | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Obama is not a socialist...the closest thing to socialism that I see out there is the current adminstration deciding to take over Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and bailing out Bear Stearns.

Posted by: HESS
----------------------------------------------
That's not socialism - it's national socialism, otherwise known as fascim. The intricate merging of government and business interests. Look for the government takeover of Krupp Arms Works and IG Farben next week - you know, IG Farben, it's a gaz, gaz, gaz...

Posted by: treetopflyer | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Obama's problem with the financial crisis is that much of the blame can laid at the feet of his own party. It was Clinton who started exporting jobs, Clinton who signed the repeal of Glass/Steagel, Clinton who failed to restructure the regulatory system to deal with with the broker/dealer banks. Finally, it was Clinton again who kept Greenspan around for another eight years. All of this was done to please the crowd on Wall Street, to whom he owed his Presidency. When Clinton won the New York primary, after losing New Hampshire, it was clear that the fix was in.

Posted by: amboycharlie | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

McCain did an excellent job in his speech on economic crisis - calm / reassuring / confident

Obama did a horrible job in his speech on economic crisis - doom / gloom / failure /total collapse / The Great Depression.

The rookie Obama failed again in a crisis - using fear and putting panic in the hearts of America that could cause damage beyond repair - runs on banks.

OMG - please America see how Obama was acutally excited over the bad news - so he could use it to get elected - this man will destroy America for his own self interests.

Posted by: jlpIllinois | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Obama is not a socialist...the closest thing to socialism that I see out there is the current adminstration deciding to take over Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and bailing out Bear Stearns.

Posted by: HESS
----------------------------------------------
That's not socialism - it's national socialism, otherwise known as fascim. The intricate merging of government and business interests. Look for the government takeover of Krupp Arms Works and IG Farben next week - you know, IG Farben, it's a gaz, gaz, gaz...

Posted by: treetopflyer | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Obama is not a socialist...the closest thing to socialism that I see out there is the current adminstration deciding to take over Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and bailing out Bear Stearns.

Posted by: HESS
----------------------------------------------
That's not socialism - it's national socialism, otherwise known as fascim. The intricate merging of government and business interests. Look for the government takeover of Krupp Arms Works and IG Farben next week - you know, IG Farben, it's a gaz, gaz, gaz...

Posted by: treetopflyer | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

One question: If your pension was riding on its success and you could select either Senator Obama or Senator McCain to run a large international company, who would you select?

I'd select the Harvard Law Review president, too.

Please America, give us the same chance.

Posted by: amaikovich | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Obama should appoint a national commission of all eligible voters to report back on November 4 on the subject of Republican financial "regulation".

Posted by: Bill | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

BetterChoice:

Look for our ground game not just the polls

Posted by: O'Baby | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

You know instead of trying to blaim McCain for the situation he could grab Joe Biden and head to the Senate and write some laws that actually solve the problem.

Or Mccain could do the same. Talk is cheap. Perhaps these 3 senators could actually do their jobs for a change.

Posted by: atomic | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Hussein couldn't run a firecracker stand.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Obama is not a socialist...the closest thing to socialism that I see out there is the current adminstration deciding to take over Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac
Posted by: HESS
.
.
.
.
.
Fannie and Freddie has funneled $120,000 in campaign contributions to Hussein the Socialist.

I'm sure it was sent to him out of the goodness of their hearts without any strings attached.

And apparently Hussein the Socialist isn't giving it back anytime soon.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Don't expect Obama to do anything; he doesn't have the grey matter between his sundials to figure out anything that's not written on a teleprompter.

You gonna trust a man who picked Joe Biden over Hillary Clinton to fix something?

Posted by: viejo1 | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Obama is not a socialist...the closest thing to socialism that I see out there is the current adminstration deciding to take over Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac
Posted by: HESS
.
.
.
.
.
Fannie and Freddie has funneled $120,000 in campaign contributions to Hussein the Socialist.

I'm sure it was sent to him out of the goodness of their hearts without any strings attached.

And apparently Hussein the Socialist isn't giving it back anytime soon.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

I gotta say, this iteration of the wapo board has been refreshingly comic so far.

There are still libtrolls posting gems along the lines of "I'm preggers"-Porky Palin.

Libs are hysterical when panicking, and the closer we get to the GOP win (again), the more laughable they act.

Now they're saying Obama can take advantage of the current crisis and regain momentum.

When pigs fly. He hasn't got the gray matter between his sundials.

You expect a man who chose Joe Biden over Hillary Clinton to know anything about anything?

heh-heh

Posted by: viejo1 | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

BetterChoice:

Look for our ground game not just the polls

Posted by: O'Baby | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

When Karl Rove goes on FOX News and says that a Republican's ads have gone too far, the sky is falling:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/14/campaign.wrap/

Then again, McBane's campaign manager is Rove's protege, so he's not really putting the blame where blame is due.

Posted by: Dr. Don Key | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Hussein couldn't run a firecracker stand.

Posted by: slappy white | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

When Karl Rove goes on FOX News and says that a Republican's ads have gone too far, the sky is falling:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/14/campaign.wrap/

Then again, McBane's campaign manager is Rove's protegee, so he's not really putting the blame where blame is due.

Posted by: Dr. Don Key | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

I gotta say, this iteration of the wapo board has been refreshingly comic so far.

There are still libtrolls posting gems along the lines of "I'm preggers"-Porky Palin.

Libs are hysterical when panicking, and the closer we get to the GOP win (again), the more laughable they act.

Now they're saying Obama can take advantage of the current crisis and regain momentum.

When pigs fly. He hasn't got the gray matter between his sundials.

You expect a man who chose Joe Biden over Hillary Clinton to know anything about anything?

heh-heh

Posted by: viejo1 | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

I gotta say, this iteration of the wapo board has been refreshingly comic so far.

There are still libtrolls posting gems along the lines of "I'm preggers"-Porky Palin.

Libs are hysterical when panicking, and the closer we get to the GOP win (again), the more laughable they act.

Now they're saying Obama can take advantage of the current crisis and regain momentum.

When pigs fly. He hasn't got the gray matter between his sundials.

You expect a man who chose Joe Biden over Hillary Clinton to know anything about anything?

heh-heh

Posted by: viejo1 | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse


Hussein the Socialist couldn't tell a treasury bill from a Lincoln Continental.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

"Vote for someone smarter than you. Vote for someone who inspires you. Vote for someone who has not only traveled the world but who has also shown a deep understanding and compassion for it"

Obama is NOT smarter than I am. He's probably not even smarter than you. Too bad so many people fell for that particular snow job.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Anyone remember the Keating Five Scandal and the S&L disaster? Our ol' boy McCain was right at the center of it with his "economics is not my strong suit" judgment on full display. No, he was not found to have committed an ethics violation but trying to impress his rich inlaws he came very close and his judgment on this economic matter was condemned by his senate colleagues. Can't wait to see how many of Bush's economic advisors end up on McCain's brilliant "commission". Thought government was already too big? Can't he find an agency, department or regulatory body that is already studying this?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 5:59 PM | Report abuse

I don't think McCain will lose one wink of sleep the day after he is elected ... worrying about the American people and their economic plight.

Pity!!

McCain's long term goal is to be 90 maybe 100 years old. He might have over-estimated the stamina needed for this job.

At least Bill Clinton and George Bush has easy going personalities ... this job ages people ... imagine what it might do to McCain as he tend to get loining mad and is likely to flip the wrong switch.

George can ave a good laugh at himself ... and we all know what Bill did for relaxation.

My Drean Tickets went like this:

Sure win: O'Bama/Bloomberg or Clinton/Obama
Maybe: O'Bama/Biden ... if Biden can keep his foot out of his mouth ... but, how I wish the "O" in O'Bama represented IRISH ... he needs to step up to a good street fight.

I want so much for the American people to win ... and end this partisan and divisive bickering. Tell me 1 thing that Bush and the Congress got done in the past 8 years ... you have 5 seconds.

See what I mean?

Posted by: BetterChoice | September 16, 2008 5:55 PM | Report abuse

The only opportunity Wall Street's problems is going to give Obama is an opportunity to showcase more of his weaknesses and lack of record and preparation to take over this country as its President; he's simply unprepared to lead this nation.

Posted by: workinggirl | September 16, 2008 5:55 PM | Report abuse

Obama is not a socialist...the closest thing to socialism that I see out there is the current adminstration deciding to take over Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and bailing out Bear Stearns. But you know...the fundamentals of the economy are still strong...WHAT A SICK SICK JOKE!! If any of you are going to choose to vote against your own economic situations in this climate you are completely out of your mind and need to be seeking mental help! Meaning, if you are making less then $250,000 annually, what in the world are you doing voting for a republican?

Posted by: HESS | September 16, 2008 5:50 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous, you are the Cretan that you rail against. Please stop hanging false names on the Democrats, you Nazi, neoFascist pig. You can take some lipstick and paint yourself with it.

May the Lord forgive me, but I've had enough of Anonymous, a person who has to hide.

Posted by: EarlC | September 16, 2008 5:50 PM | Report abuse

Dan Balz wonders how Obama will respond to the "unexpected opportunity" the financial crises has given him?

Why, with a whole lot of BS, smoke, mirrors and crazed media begging to kiss his ring.

Posted by: JAH | September 16, 2008 5:49 PM | Report abuse

This article's premise is that Obama take advantage of the financial disaster to try to regain the lead. Hurricanes, wars, financial crises-Democrats love a good disaster, no matter what it does to the country; as long as they are able to capitalize politically, they're happy.

So, what does Obama do?

We have been made aware of William Jefferson's ability to save money; he could help.

Charlie Rangel is real good with taxes.

Let's see, maybe Obama can give back the donations made to him by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mack. He's a junior Senator, in office about 36 months, and he was the number 3 donation recipient! That's gonna go over great in the debates.

Add the documented fact that McCain tried to push through some legislation to pull in the reins on these institutions (after predicted this outcome) back in 2005, and Barry's got a little more hot water to in which to thrash around.

McCain 63% Obama 44%

These figures basically grade the American voters' trust in the respective candidates right now.

Posted by: viejo1 | September 16, 2008 5:47 PM | Report abuse

Now, which team are you going to hire ?
Posted by: HESS
.
.
.
.
----------------

Andover, Yale and Harvard cranked out a terd named George W. Bush.

He singlehandedly destroys your argument.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 5:46 PM | Report abuse

We are seeing the result of Republican anti-reform, anti-regulatory attitudes. The Republicans have removed depression era firewalls and build in controls. In addition, Bush administration has outsourced, like everything else, its oversight to Wall Street! Phil “Enron loophole” Graham (who is Senator John McCain's economic adviser and cochairs his presidential campaign) is the single most responsible person of this meltdown. Phil “mental recession” Graham with the blessing his Republican cronies gutted the Glass-Seagal Act by clandestinely slipped a 262-page amendment into the omnibus appropriations bill. The purpose of Glass-Seagal was to separate commercial banks that focus on consumers from investment banks, which deal with speculative trading and mergers.

They replaced with Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act: allowing commercial banks, investment banks, and insurers to merge (which would have violated antitrust laws under Glass-Steagall). Once the Act passed, an influx of "megamergers" took place among banks and insurance and securities companies that resulted today’s mega-investment houses.

In 2003, Gramm left the Senate to join UBS, which had acquired investment house PaineWebber due to his deregulation bill. At UBS, Gramm lobbied Congress, the Fed and the Treasury Department. During Gramm's tenor at UBS and as a lobbyist, Congress passed the Responsible Lending Act, billed as an anti-predatory-lending measure, but was called the "Loan Shark Protection Act" by consumer advocates, as it was designed to preempt stronger state laws against anti-predatory lending. The Fed largely ignored the underlying and growing problems within the subprime mortgage/housing markets.

And there you have it: An unmanned house, with very little safeguards and controls in place driven by uncontrolled greed. The result: depression era similar situation.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 5:45 PM | Report abuse

For both candidates picking a VP - Michael Bloomsberg

Posted by: BetterChoice | September 16, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

The term "excitement over Palin" keeps coming out of the mouths and the type written words of the punditry. Maybe for the republican base there is excitement, but for those of us who do not wish to give the republicans another 4 years to squander, it is more curiosity and wonder. She does nothing for me and schrill of a voice she has just drives me nuts! If she was put on the ticket as a symbol of reform, someone needs to share that with her. Lying, is not reform! Politicians already do that. When Americans ask themselves truthfully if this is the best POSSIBLE choice to be the number two in this country, they will make the right selection. This is not American Idol, this is the Presidency and Vice Presidency of the United States. Even if some want to vote out of spite, that will be overcome with "common sense" when the day arrives and careful thought and consideration is put into selecting the next President and Vice President.

Posted by: CitizenAJ | September 16, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

McCain says he is going to stop greed and go after "fat cat" CEO's who get big bonuses when they leave companies they have left worse off than when they got there.

Case in point, he is going after ex HP exec Carly Fiorino, who got a 25 million dollar severance package after leaving HP much worse than she go it. How is he going after her, by employing her in his campaign as one of his top economic advisers.

Don't believe me, look into it yourself. And if you think the MSM is biased against McCain, ask yourself why they haven't reported this little fact yet.

Posted by: Get Real McCain | September 16, 2008 5:42 PM | Report abuse

You loons can sit with Do-Nothing Nancy Pelosi around the Thanksgiving table and marvel amongst yourselves on how Hussein the Socialist came thiiiiss close to be President.

That is, if you cretins even observe Thanksgiving.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 5:42 PM | Report abuse

You are The Boss... which team would you hire?

With America facing historic debt, multiple war fronts, stumbling health care, a weakened dollar, all-time high prison population, skyrocketing Federal spending, mortgage crises, bank foreclosures, etc. etc., this is an unusually critical election year.

Let's look at the educational background of your two options:

Obama:

Occidental College - Two years.

Columbia University - B.A. politic al science with a specialization in international relations.

Harvard - Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude

& Biden:

University of Delaware - B.A. in history and B.A. in political science.

Syracuse University College of Law - Juris Doctor (J.D.)

vs.

McCain:

United States Naval Academy - Class rank 894 of 899

& Palin:

Hawaii Pacific University - 1 semester

North Idaho College - 2 semesters - general study

University of Idaho - 2 semesters - journalism

Matanuska-Susitna College - 1 semester

University of Idaho - 3 semesters - B.A. in journalism

Now, which team are you going to hire ?

Posted by: HESS | September 16, 2008 5:41 PM | Report abuse

Dan writes: "The mystery of why Obama has not gained a greater advantage on the economy remains."

Simple. Obama's policies on taxes, trade, and energy would KILL JOBS and growth !!

American workers are not stupid.

Posted by: Petras Vilson | September 16, 2008 5:40 PM | Report abuse

Maybe it's the forum, but you'd think in a time like this, there might be one serious, considered thread discussing real issues - whether there may be some real short-term benefits of u.s. oil drilling, or what the regulatory decisions were that led us to our current crisis. Or what the most effective approach to Georgia will be in the next 4 yrs?

Reading instead the GOP and liberal screamers on this site is disheartening. If this is our citizenry, maybe we're just proving the country deserves no better than its people are.

Posted by: indie | September 16, 2008 5:40 PM | Report abuse

If people would research the price of gas and cost of living prior to 2007 (when GOP controlled Congress) and after 2007 (currently controlled by the Democrats), you would see that we were far better off before those idiots took over in 07!!!

Posted by: Allan | September 16, 2008 4:55 PM
---------------------
So, in your infinite wisdom, you have determind that it's the dastardly Dems who increased the price of oil, over the objections of the republicans, and hence inflationary pressures?

How, exactly, did they do that, oh brilliant one?


Posted by: michael4 | September 16, 2008 5:40 PM | Report abuse

I believe Obama when he said believes in "change". If you look at his history he's "changed" his mind on so many different issues. I think this is the only time I've seen a politician honest about what they're going to do if they get elected. You better believe he's going to "change" his mind again on stuff he's promised voters. I used to consider myself a republican and I'm not so happy with our candidate either... I think more people need to vote for the 3rd parties. GO GREEN, GO INDEPENDANT, GO CONSTITUTION PARTY. Vote 3rd party to let them know that we're not happy with our choices and that we do care. This messed up duopoly that we have deciding our country's fate is broken and only we "the people" can fix it. Honestly the one thing that would help the good ole' USA get back on top with the economy would be the legalization of marijuana, It would stop the $7 BILLION dollars every year spent keeping it illegal and estimated reports show that if it were taxed the same as alcohol and tobacco it would bring in about $6 BILLION Dollars on top of the $7 Billion Dollars we would save. Estimated Hemp industry would also bring in an estimated $20 Billion per year in revenue for us. And for all of you who oppose, ask yourselves why? There are approx. 440,000 death per year from alcohol. 80,000 deaths from tobacco, 400,000 from obesity and eating disorders, and 0 yes thats ZERO from marijuana every year.... Don't even get me started on the pharmacuetical companies.. They're whole business depends on you staying sick and needing more medicine, not on you getting better and not needing to take anything..

Posted by: Ben | September 16, 2008 5:39 PM | Report abuse

Hello Anonymous

SPIN SPIN SPIN

This is what the REPUBLICANS DO ... After 8 years of republican Administration IT IS THE DEMOCRATS FAULT.... This is why politicians cannot be trusted ... THEY CAMPAIGN WITH LIES and expect if or when they get elected we trust them??!! This is laughable.

Note the scare mongering ... OBAMA IS GOING TO RAISE TAXES ... How do they know??!! because "we republicans say so" ... LIES LIES LIES and SPIN SPIN SPIN - Win at all cost even if it means hiding behind a skirt. As an independent I would be equally turned off by the Democrats if they tried to pull a stunt like ... using a woman just to get a female vote. Most republicans think their women should cover their heads, be submissive and not have a career. They are now so adoring over Sarah but, what irked them about Hillary is that she is an independent woman and a very capable one also.

So SPIN SPIN SPIN - and see if you WIN WIN WIN

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 5:39 PM | Report abuse

He won't regain momentum this way.

He's whining again.

And where did he get that Southern accent. Hawaii, Indonesia, Harvard, Chicago?

These places are not in the South.

He's faking this accent, but I really don't know why.

Just listen to him. I can't anymore, it's awful. He says nothing, and its a FAKE accent.

Posted by: tennismom | September 16, 2008 5:38 PM | Report abuse

"Financial crisis presents candidate with chance to recover what was lost in excitement over Palin."

What really appalls me is the fact that anything at all was lost in "excitement" over Palin.
A story about more smoke coming out of Cheney's offices is all it would take, yet again, to deflect the "attention" of the ADS majority of Americans from the murder, theft and treason taking place under their very noses.

We're getting used to it, folks.
Time to say, STOP! We are not putting up with this any more.

Posted by: wardropper | September 16, 2008 5:37 PM | Report abuse

"laissez-faire approach to economic policy?"

It's a joke to call the policy favored and supported by Republicans as laissez-faire when we bail out the big failures, but not small business; when we spend trillions+ in middle class war taxes to project power into the world's oil regions then watch Exxon take the profits; when we give away tens of billions for big nuclear expansion but just chump change for wind and solar; when we externalize environmental remediation costs for nuclear and coal, decade after decade; when US courts let Microsoft bully out all its competitors with pure coercion in the US as it cannot in the EU. WTF is "laissez-faire" about any of this? If we had a free market instead of cronyism and a swinging door in Washington, corporate executives would be faced with the very unfamiliar prospect of making a living.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 5:37 PM | Report abuse

Have they embalmed Joe Biden yet?

Imagine a Joe Biden Action Figure! Silent Joe!

Posted by: DaTourist | September 16, 2008 5:36 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous states:
"the tenor of comments on here, especially from the democrat side, is sad. and honestly, i think obama shoulders a lot of the blame."

Well, look just above my last comment and I thinnk you'll notice the caustic tenor of the Republicans. I guess I should hold that lying McCain as a reason. :)

It was interesting to note that Anonymous attributes the current mortgage crisis to the Travelgate situation under Clinton. Excuse me if I do not see the connection. I do see a connection between Bush's Texas home mortgage crisis and the current national crisis. The pathway was very similar.

Perhaps Neil Bush and his problem in the S&L crisis back in a precious Republican administration can shed more light on the financial crisis today.

In all of the crises that have happened on the Republican watch, their answer is to bailout big business. The average worker is doomed.


Posted by: EarlC | September 16, 2008 5:33 PM | Report abuse

Famous pro-wrestiling manager of yesteryear, Bobby "The Brain" Heanan, when asked what he found most scary about your average pro-wrestling crowd famously answered "They can breed and they can vote".

How right he was.

Posted by: joebewildered | September 16, 2008 5:32 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 5:22 PM

"This paper is worthless [] on any given day there are 5 anti mccain/palin stories,1 (maybe) critical story of Obama and 5 shills stories for obama. "

-----------------
Well, another way to look at it, is that that's the reality: McCain has 5 bad ideas and no good ones, Obama 5 excellent ideas and (maybe) one doubtful. And that's a view of a conservative Washington Post.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 5:31 PM | Report abuse

>>Start with the Clinton travel fiascoes and it all continued from there.
How much clearer do they have to make it?
Reality is to Republicans as salt is to slugs.....

Posted by: dijetlo | September 16, 2008 5:30 PM | Report abuse

Who the hell is going to believe that Obama is "working" for real people when all he does is hand out with the $28,000 a plate crowd known as the mega-rich? When McCain and Palin win, at least you'll all know that the smartest ticket won...and the middle class, professionals and doctors and PhDs. also won. Who will lose? the mega-rich.

Posted by: realist | September 16, 2008 5:30 PM | Report abuse

John McCain's econ adviser Phil Gramm's UBS is also said to be in deep trouble.

This is not an election against respectable Republicans that you disagree with. This election is about fighting against subversive right wing insurgent rebels against the United States.

Obama/Biden 08!!!

Posted by: American Spirit | September 16, 2008 5:29 PM | Report abuse

I read columns like this one with wonder.

I watched and heard Obama speak today at Golden, CO. Scoff and scorn are inaccurate descriptions. The speech opened with a sharp attack on McCain. Then Obama stated his economic principles and then he listed and talked about a number of specific remedies.

I wonder how the actual facts change in Mr. Balz's behind as begins to write.

A word about Mr. McCain's blaming Wall Street greed and corruption and the appointment of commission to investigate, etc. The commission is device aimed at sending to oblivion any discussion of real solutions. The greed and corruption claim is ironic. McCain is biting his own backside and, maybe, he does not realize he is.

Then, there is the "mystery to me" statement in the next to last paragraph of this piece. No mystery Mr. Balz. Just look in the mirror and see the white guy you are and realize that there are a lot of white folks who will not vote for Senator Obama period.

The close vote is not result of Obama not making strong enough statements. Its not the result of Mcain/Palin false populism, fantasy and mendacity. Its race.

Now, many folks will hit me for bring up race. At least I am honest about it. At least I do not pretend its not there.


Posted by: Peter | September 16, 2008 5:29 PM | Report abuse

Chinaman for president


I promise every citizen will have a couch and unlimited supply of potato chip. Here are my solutions to all our problems.

Federal deficit. No more foreign invasion like Iraq. Enough billions will be saved to fulfill my above promise for many generations!

Trade deficit. Sell every missile, atomic bomb and carrier to China as we do not need them any more. Make the Chinese promise not to use them against us, or we can change the GPS to reroute all the missiles back to Beijing.

Human rights. No gun for our citizens. If that Chinese had an AK 45 in the Beijing Olympic incidence, imagine how many would be killed. Learn from the human right lovers.

Illegal immigrants. When caught, send them to Alaska for the hardest labor on earth. I bet even the dumbest Mexican will not come here illegally. Problem solved. The nice guy I pay pennies to clean up my yard is the only exception.

Education. Just import some smart, young, educated Chinese that they have plenty to spare. Why spend billions to produce mediocre college graduates who cannot count from 1 to 12 (unless they have 12 fingers)?

Social welfare. All cheaters including all politicians will be sent to China for re-education, so they will be more productive.

This message is paid by your friendly Chinese government, who wants you buy more couches and potato chips.

Posted by: TonyP4 | September 16, 2008 5:27 PM | Report abuse


the tenor of comments on here, especially from the democrat side, is sad. and honestly, i think obama shoulders a lot of the blame.

wasnt he supposed to bring a new kind of politics? wasnt he supposed to be post-partisan and engage in civil debate?

but he turned down a chance to do town hall debates with mccain, and he can't even control his own supporters. except, of course, when he has them call chicago radio stations and try to jam their phone lines when they are interviewing an anti-obama author.

obama is all talk, no walk

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 5:26 PM | Report abuse

When we look at what the Clinton admin we will see the mortgage mess was started with democrats but continued with Bush. I blame both sides. If you were a reporter you would look to the truth not the politics. I watched a couple buy a house in 2006 for 490,000, it had been bought for 365,00 in 2005. No one was doing there job. Look at what the political hacks were paid to be put in charge of things they didn't know anything about. Start with the Clinton travel fiascoes and it all continued from there.

terrence kink
Scottsdale,AZ

Posted by: tk | September 16, 2008 5:24 PM | Report abuse

The only way these two empty suit loud mouth Democrat Liberal Losers fake Messiah
Barack Hussein Obama and Big Shot Old old
time Democrat Party Hack Motor Mouth Joe Biden can regain momentum will be just more
and more empty and unkept phony promises
of ever more nanny state womb to the tomb
creeping Socialist combined with even more
personal attacks and lies and smears against Sen John McCain and Gov Sarah Palin
since that is all Messiah Obama and Big
Talk BS Joe Biden and the Democrats know.

And, meanwhile the Democrats have another
Big Time Problem called The Phony Antics of
Mad Madame Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Democrat House Ways and Means Committee
Chairman Charlie Rangel,that famous at least eight houses or condos and lies about
his Income Tax Charter Member of the Madame
Nancy Pelosi Democrat Culture of Corruption
Club in our own US Congress that on top of
all of Nutso Nancy Pelosi's other crazy
antics and FUBAR Fun,will cost the Democrats both the White House and Control
of Congress as well. Your Doing A Heck Of
A Job Here,Baracky,Joe,Nancy,Charlie and
Cold Cash Jefferson of Proving the Democrats Are Even More Corrupt Then Bush
and Cheney and all the Republicans Put
Together. A Vote For Obama and Biden and
Any Democrat on the Ballot Is A Vote To
Support Obama,Biden,and Nancy Pelosi Culture of Corruption in 2008! NOWAY!

Posted by: Ralphinphnx | September 16, 2008 5:24 PM | Report abuse

.
.
Do-Nothing Nancy chimes in...
.
.
.
Pelosi: Dems bear no responsibility for economic crisis

By Klaus Marre, The Hill
Posted: 09/16/08 04:14 PM

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, when asked Tuesday whether Democrats bear some of the responsibility regarding the current crisis on Wall Street, had a one-word answer: “No.”

Pelosi (D-Calif.) ripped President Bush’s “mismanagement” of the economy and a lack of regulation that led to the current situation.

“I think the American people have had it with this situation where the middle-income people in our country are not protected from the ramifications of the risk-taking and the greed of these financial institutions,” Pelosi told MSNBC.

When asked whether the Democrats “deserve some responsibility” regarding the economic crisis, Pelosi responded: “No.”

“John McCain said that this is a result of overregulation by the Democrats in Congress,” she added. “Either he doesn’t know what he's talking about or he’s misrepresenting the facts as he knows them. But it’s simply not true.”

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 5:22 PM | Report abuse

Oh, doesn't the shill WAPO hope! This paper is worthless, look at the front page on any givenday and there are 5 anti mccain/palin stories,1 (maybe) critical story of Obama and 5 shills stories for obama. No wonder the WAPO has such little respect as a fair and balanced paper.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 5:22 PM | Report abuse


latest Rasmussen NJ poll: Obama +3

Obama +3!!!

add in the bradely effect, and obama must be down 2 or 3 points in true blue country.

this could be a mccain landslide!!!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 5:22 PM | Report abuse

Q: "Can somebody tell me when America became Bizzaro World?"

A: January 20, 2001

Posted by: castanea | September 16, 2008 5:21 PM | Report abuse

I just heard it again from a Republican operative. Cut the taxes and increase the tax revenue. At what point will this priciple stop working? I ask this question because the logical curve drawn on a piece of graph paper would indicate that zero income taxes should produce an unlimited stream of tax revenue to the Federal government.

People, it defies all logic that reducing taxes increases tax revenue. Keeping tax rate as the only variable with all other known variables held constant, tax revenue has to go down. If policies are put in place that allow other variables to change, such as people employed, personal salaries, and so forth, then you begin to see how tax revenue may be affected. If the employment situation in our country indicates that higher paying jobs are being replaced by lower paying jobs, then it only stands to reason that the tax revenue goes down on this variable. If, as we have witnessed recently, that unemployment is going up, then this variable also indicates a reduced tax revenue. Put all of these variables into play, there is only one way for the tax revenue to go. DOWN!

I am listening to Mitt Romney who is arguing that Obama cannot add new spending programs to work our way out of this problem. My answer: thank you Franklin Roosevelt for doing exactly this to get us out of the last major recession.

These Republicans, many of whom have subscribed to the programs that have gotten us into this budget and financial mess, are still arguing that their programs are still best for America. What gives?

Posted by: EarlC | September 16, 2008 5:21 PM | Report abuse

"don't insult my intelligence, ranting, insulting IS NOT making an intelligent case for Obama"

Ah, another rightwing tactic: Projecting your own shortcomings onto your opponent.

Give us, then, an intelligent, rational argument for voting for McCain.

Posted by: castanea | September 16, 2008 5:20 PM | Report abuse

"hey buttlugi"
Oooooh, a member of the Republican brain trust, I'm honored.
" it was clinton's cronies who looted fannie and freddie "
Sure, sure, the friends of the Democratic president who left office in January of 2000 pillaged the treasurey of fannie mae and freddie mac seven years into the republican adminstration.
So why didn't George stop them?
The other problem you need to work on is nobody looted fannie and fredie, they bought a lot of bad mortgage paper, that's how they ended up in trouble...sorry to whup you with the reality stick so late in the day but, well, you asked for it.
Reality is too Republicans as salt is too slugs.

Posted by: dijetlo | September 16, 2008 5:20 PM | Report abuse

There's some interesting spin coming from ol' straight-talker Johnny McCain today considering that he has voted with Bush over 90% of the time the last eight years and that McCain's economic advisor, Phil Gramm, was the biggest player out there in the deregulating of Wall Street.
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxXMFW1YsNQ
.

Posted by: say what? | September 16, 2008 5:20 PM | Report abuse

If Obama wants my respect and vote he will have to out the democrats that caused much of this problem and made millions working for Freddie and Fanny. If he wants change he is going to have to call out corruption in his own party just as McCain and Palin have.

Posted by: Hal | September 16, 2008 5:18 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats need to get the truth out about Republican 'tinkle-down' economics, that pee on the average citizen.

Posted by: oldhonky | September 16, 2008 5:16 PM | Report abuse

To the one claiming that McCain is blasting his top contributor...
I believe we saw Fannie Mae go under last week, and do you know who the top 4 receivers of their funds were?
1.) Chris Dodd
2.) John Kerry
3.) *Barack Obama*
4.) Hillary Clinton

If you wish to be upset at the contribution taking of candidates, at least be fair about it.

Posted by: Tim | September 16, 2008 5:16 PM | Report abuse

Can somebody tell me when America became Bizzaro World?

Posted by: joebewildered | September 16, 2008 5:16 PM | Report abuse

Just weeks before the election, there are questions about a controversial insert published in The Orlando Sentinel. The insert on radical Islam included a 60-minute DVD.

Over 300,000 copies of "Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against The West" went out to Orlando residents as an insert in Sunday's Sentinel. Twenty-eight million copies will go out in swing states nationwide by the end of the week.

The Clarion Fund paid millions of dollars to get the DVD out. It's a non-profit organization that claims to focus on national security. Eyewitness News asked the New York-based group and they would not say exactly how many millions they receive or who their donors are.

Posted by: Anti-dirty tricks | September 16, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

You know Charlie, I can see Russia from an island in Alaska. And am I hot looking or what?

Posted by: rbauer5 | September 16, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

The unreported story (who's going to report it anyway) is that when Wall Street cratered yesterday the MSM, including this paper, were forced to talk about a real issue in this election instead McGoo's joke of a nominee. Sorry boys. Think of this as practice in case any of you decide to be real journalists again. Imagine, real journalists covering real issues. Be still my heart.

Posted by: max | September 16, 2008 5:12 PM | Report abuse

The main issue in the election campaign, as Senator Clinton astutely observed in the primary, is the deteriorating quality of life of Americans, along with declining international respect for our power and a corresponding spread of international cynicism about our commitment to our democratic ideals. Obama is the last best hope of a restoration of our quality of life and international respect. Every poll in Western European democracies on which choice of Obama or McCain they would make, if they could vote in our elections, has Obama as the overwhelming choice. We can ignore the world's choice. But we cannot turn in a direction opposed to the world's expectations of our leadership. McCain inspires zip in the world. He is most vulnerable politically on his policies for the least among us. His campaign appeals to a segment of the electorate, for instance, that could care less about the 50 million Americans at risk of fending for themselves in the event of a catastrophic health condition. Millions of Americans can afford only the health care insurance offered by their employment. For the millions of Americans whose employer either does not offer them health care, for unemployed Americans who have lost their jobs or who cannot find jobs, and for migrant workers----a McCain victory will be a disaster for he will never offer them guaranteed government insured medical and dental care, but such a guarantee will be the only safety net that can save them from personal bankruptcy and the loss of life. A President Obama will see that no American goes without medical care insurance because of condition of pre-existing health, unemployment, inability to pay medical bills, or legal status.

Posted by: theDefendantX | September 16, 2008 5:10 PM | Report abuse

hey buttlugi. it was clinton's cronies who looted fannie and freddie

Posted by: dick cabesa | September 16, 2008 5:00 PM
-----------------------------
Clinton wasn't in office during the real estate (CMO) boom, you idiot!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 5:09 PM | Report abuse

It never ceases to amaze me - the insane/dumb things that come out of the minds of people still planning to vote for McCain at this point. No logical rationale offered - just hatred toward Democrats. What are you folks so angry and nervous about?

Posted by: Curious | September 16, 2008 5:08 PM | Report abuse

and reading through the vitriolic posts... to the people of this forum: please don't insult my intelligence, ranting, insulting IS NOT making an intelligent case for Obama. No wonder he's slipping on the polls, you all look like loons...

Posted by: soccermom | September 16, 2008 5:07 PM | Report abuse

Someone needs to inform Obama that he hasn't ANY experience in managing a budget much less in understanding AIG's derivatives or Wall Street or complex economic issues.. it's best for him to electioneer on another issue unless he doesn't mind come through looking like a clown running for President....

Posted by: soccermom | September 16, 2008 5:04 PM | Report abuse

.....portray McCain as a disciple of the conservative, antiregulation economic philosophy of President Bush and the Republican Party.
---------------------------
Portray? He is one of the neocons!

Posted by: michael4 | September 16, 2008 5:02 PM | Report abuse

"Out To Regain Momentum?"

God, I think he is doing just fine after the past three days.

McCain/Loser have got to figure out something to say in the next 7 weeks besides the garbage they have been spewing over the last two weeks.

Posted by: Losercuda | September 16, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

GAWWWD- This woman is a bigger idiot and criminal with each day that goes by!!


No more STOOOPID Presidents--We can do better!

Posted by: kate | September 16, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

"We will stop multimillion dollar payouts to CEOs who break the public trust," McCain said. But McCain's Economic Advisor Carly Fiorina received a $21.4 million severance package, even though her "leadership" led to 20,000 HP workers being laid off and HP stock plunging 50%. This tells me a lot about what McCain values in an advisor, and it isn't ethics or competence.

Posted by: b_side | September 16, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

hey buttlugi. it was clinton's cronies who looted fannie and freddie

Posted by: dick cabesa | September 16, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

Man, the stink of desperation is getting thick in here...
"If FDR were alive today, he would be a Republican!"
Now they're channeling dead people, is there no depth a Republican will not sink to in an effort to avoid responsibility for their failed policies?
BTW, Hoover was a Republican, FDR was a democrat but if he were alive today, based on the historical record of his words and acts, he'd probably start a political part to the left of the Democrats, but since I don't talk to dead people, it's hard to be sure.
Reality is to Republicans as salt is to slugs

Posted by: dijetlo | September 16, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

Woooyeeee.....reading all these liberal posts of anger - hate, etc, etc...No wait - thats - right - they are the party that preaches tolerance...and one of two Americas. One for Biden - who speaks the talk but can not walk it with his pawltry $380.00 a year donations to charity....YET AT A MOMENTS NOTICE WILLING TO spend THE U.S. TAX PAYERS DOLLARS ...But hey what the heck - it's not his.
Then we have Charlie - Chairmen House/Ways Cmtes - He writes the tax laws.....BUT HE DOESN"T HAVE TO FOLLOW THEM.....keeping the chairmenship - we'll see...1-2-3 mistakes.....wait now as you go back along with all the other 'press' that will review your taxes....and then we'll see the 'honest' mistakes tally up.
And let's not forget John Edwards..just an honorable mention - for he had some brass....where is he now..thats right - HIDING....And then finally wait until the commercials kick-in between BO's comments at a San Fran rally versus those he stated in rural working class Pennsylvania....what was that about clinging to a bible, gun etc....AH - there is TWO Americas....one for the DEMs....and one for the rest of us....Only the Dems would wish that we would either lose a war or that a financial collapse would be welcome news....if only to gain power.

I just luv the meltdown they are experiencing......Yep 2 Americas.
He is so far gone....I just luv

Posted by: John | September 16, 2008 4:59 PM | Report abuse

NEWSFLASH!!

No one needing a "Crash Course" on Foreign Policy 60 days prior to the election is QUALIFIED TO BE VP!!!


This is NOT a casting call for American Idol..

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 4:59 PM | Report abuse

Mavrick/Palin supporters, read my lips,,, enough is enough

Posted by: freddy | September 16, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

"clinton started the housing market crunch"
ROTFLMAO
It's as if they aren't responsible for anything they do, is it?
You have one half of the Republican party arguing they want Hillary to run (and pretending to be Dems while they do it) the other trying desperately to blame the president from 8 years ago for the current investment banking melt down.
Reality is to Republicans as salt is to slugs...

Posted by: dijetlo | September 16, 2008 4:56 PM | Report abuse

If people would research the price of gas and cost of living prior to 2007 (when GOP controlled Congress) and after 2007 (currently controlled by the Democrats), you would see that we were far better off before those idiots took over in 07!!! Why would anyone in their right mind want to vote for that pathetic excuse of a political party. If FDR were alive today, he would be a Republican!

Posted by: Allan | September 16, 2008 4:55 PM | Report abuse

Editorial
Chairman Rangel
NY Times

Published: September 14, 2008
Mounting embarrassment for taxpayers and Congress makes it imperative that Representative Charles Rangel step aside as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee while his ethical problems are investigated.

Skip to next paragraph
The Board Blog
Additional commentary, background information and other items by Times editorial writers.

Go to The Board » Readers' Comments
"Rangel will never willingly step down from anything, but will have to be dragged off, kicking and screaming."
Leeza Coleman, Manhattan
Read Full Comment »This recommendation does not come easily, considering the New York Democrat’s four decades of service in Congress. But Mr. Rangel himself has felt obliged to request three separate House ethics inquiries of his behavior. While denying serious improprieties, Mr. Rangel concedes that he has not lived up to the “higher standard” expected of members of Congress.

His latest admission is that as chief of Congress’s tax-writing committee, he was “irresponsible” in failing to disclose $75,000 in rental income and pay federal and state taxes on a villa in the Dominican Republic.

His temporary yielding of the gavel is an urgent necessity for a Democratic Congress elected two years ago on promises of an ethical housecleaning. The villa dealings only add momentum to the investigations of two earlier controversies — Mr. Rangel’s favored treatment in occupying four rent-stabilized apartments in Manhattan, and his improper use of official letterheads to solicit support from charities and corporations for an academic center to memorialize his career in public service.

Mr. Rangel has hurt his case with clumsy, combative pleas of ignorance of the facts and law involving his Dominican villa. “We do make errors, even though we consider ourselves experts in terms of tax policy for the nation,” said the lawmaker, who has three decades’ experience on Ways and Means.

His excuse of “cultural and language barriers” with Dominican officials was, simply, offensive. “Every time I thought I was getting somewhere, they’d start speaking Spanish,” complained Mr. Rangel.

At the least, the disclosures betray that gross sense of entitlement that regularly befalls politicians. At the Dominican villa, which the congressman said he came upon 20 years ago during an overseas trip with Speaker Tip O’Neill, Mr. Rangel eventually saw his 10.5 percent mortgage interest payments waived when the developer favored him as a “Pioneer” early investor.

The powerful congressman has enjoyed his rent-stabilized apartments in Harlem — improperly using one as a campaign office — at about half market value. This is a $30,000-a-year boon, and the ethics committee must decide whether it amounts to a gift from a politically savvy landlord that would violate House rules. The panel must also weigh how badly Mr. Rangel violated official letterhead restrictions.

As a new Congress approaches with a thick docket of fiscal and tax measures, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi must see that no cloud hangs over Ways and Means while the chairman is under investigation. The Democratic majority arrived last year promising to “drain the swamp” of corruption epitomized by the previous Republican majority’s quid-pro-quo dealings with Jack Abramoff, the now-imprisoned superlobbyist.

Committee posts are not bestowed by voters. They are partisan privileges granted by leaders in Congress, and Ms. Pelosi must not cut slack for an ally. If Mr. Rangel refuses a temporary hiatus from his chairmanship, Ms. Pelosi should remove him permanently.

-------------


Rangel to Remain as Committee Chief
NY Times-

By DAVID KOCIENIEWSKI and RAYMOND HERNANDEZ
Published: September 16, 2008
Representative Charles B. Rangel will not step down from the chairmanship of the House Ways and Means Committee, despite pressure from Republicans and others who say his leadership is being undermined by his swirling ethical problems.

Skip to next paragraph
Related
Rangel, Pressured, Meets With Leaders (September 16, 2008) Mr. Rangel’s lawyer, Lanny Davis, told reporters during a conference call on Tuesday that the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, supports his decision to remain in the chairmanship. The announcement came after Mr. Rangel, the 78-year-old Harlem Democrat, met behind closed doors on Monday with the speaker and other party leaders.

Mr. Davis said Mr. Rangel was addressing the ethical issues in a forthright way by asking the House ethics committee for an investigation, and hiring an accountant to report on his finances directly to the committee.

“The chairman believes that the facts should prevail, not innuendo or editorial opinion, or the partisan actions of the Republican leadership,” Mr. Davis said.

About the possibility of stepping aside temporarily, while the ethics committee conducts its review, Mr. Davis said, “It’s not even on the table.”

Mr. Davis added: “Mr. Rangel believes, I believe and his colleagues believe that making inadvertent errors with no intention to conceal, no personal enrichment and no corruption of the public trust, is not disqualifying. He is prepared to let his constituents make the final judgment on his fitness to serve. Whatever the facts are, he has not dishonored the House, he has not dishonored himself he has not done anything intentionally wrong.”

Asked if Mr. Rangel could change his mind after the ethics investigation is complete, Mr. Davis said, “I’m not going to answer a hypothetical.”

Less than two years ago, Mr. Rangel realized his dream of gaining the chairmanship of the powerful committee, which writes the federal tax code. But he has been under fire in recent weeks for an assortment of ethical questions. Late last week, Ms. Pelosi brushed aside Republican requests that he step down, saying they were an attempt to politicize his problems during an election season.

But Mr. Rangel acknowledged on Monday that there were more errors and omissions on his financial disclosure forms, and said he would hire a forensic accounting company to pore over his records. Some Democrats expressed worry that Mr. Rangel’s continued leadership could hurt the party’s candidates this fall.

One concern Democratic leaders have discussed is whether Mr. Rangel’s vacating his post could set a precedent in which chairmen who have not been charged criminally may be forced from their positions.

The New York Times reported in July that Mr. Rangel, a 19-term congressman, had leased rent-stabilized apartments from a prominent New York developer, including one that he used as a fund-raising office, in violation of state regulations.

He has also been criticized for using his official stationery to solicit donations for a City University of New York school of public service that will bear his name, failing to report — or pay taxes on — $75,000 in rental income from his villa in the Dominican Republic over the past two decades and failing to disclose that the owners of the beach house had given him a mortgage on the property and waived the interest for more than a decade.

Mr. Rangel tried to defuse the furor last week at a news conference and by releasing hundreds of pages of documents and assuring the public that he had “done nothing morally wrong.”

He has said he would vacate the apartment he had used as a campaign office, but insisted that he had never helped — or even met — the landlord whose generosity allowed him to save more than $30,000 a year on the multiple rent-stabilized apartments.

He also said he had never used his power or public position to help any of the business leaders or foundations he had asked to support the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service at CUNY. Mr. Rangel also described his failure to disclose his income from the beachfront villa, or pay taxes on it, as an unintentional oversight by his staff members, his wife and himself.

But Mr. Rangel’s explanations did little to quiet the criticism, and his contention that he had been unable to get financial records on the villa for 20 years because of “cultural and language barriers” brought new calls from Republicans and newspaper editorial boards for him to step down as chairman.
___________

Yeah Neither Obama nor his supporter Rangel has a mortgage crisis- They break the law and live in luxury- Obama took 300k off the price of his mansion and when caught returned 150k in campaign donations from Rezko...never donated personal funds...

Posted by: Scott | September 16, 2008 4:53 PM | Report abuse

McCain's health care plan will make us pay taxes on our employer provided health care benefits. A GOP tax hike on the middle an lower classes while cutting those for the rich.

Posted by: GOP Taxes | September 16, 2008 4:51 PM | Report abuse

The daily drum beat from the MSM/WAPO continues and McCain continues to do better in the polls.

Let's get to the facts about Obama...


Obama is a Nancy Pelosi, Dick Durbin Ted Kennedy democrat. His main support comes from wacko granola eating SanFran hollywood liberals that are completely out of touch with true American values. These are the elitist leftist Obama was addressing at a (now $28500 a plate with Barbara Striesand) fundraiser in SanFran when he talked down to hard working middle Americans - suggesting that they are clinging to their guns and religion. He's been shown to have ties with Saudi sympathizers, Bill Ayers and Frank Marshall Davis - a communist descibed as a early mentor for Obama. He has been described as the most liberal senator and is clearly outside the mainstream. This is what you will never hear from the WAPO/MSM.

Well, that's ok if this is where he's from and that's what he thinks. Just don't try to turn around and ask middle America for their vote. Because he won't get it.

The real story about Obama will be told before the election. His true colors will come out.

The dems had a chance to elect a candidate that appealed to more mainstream values in Hillary Clinton who supported in many ways working middle class deimocrats. But Kennedy and Axlerod and all the other hollywood loving leftwing wackos propped up Obama instead. We see now many Hillary supporters and independants turning away from Obama because of this.

This is why Obama and the dems will lose on November 4th.

McCain is a great partiot.

Vote McCain.

Posted by: md | September 16, 2008 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Obama has a golden opportunity to outline a program to stimulate the economy. It must be an aggressive program with ideas which will allow the average citizen to regain some of their losses in investments and real estate. McCain has opened the door with his statements about letting AIG, Lehman, Merrill, etc. fail. He doesn't have a clue of what a disaster has been created by letting Fannie and Freddie being taken over in a conservatorship by the government and wiping out all equity interests in these enterprises. McCAin and Palin have shown that we get 4 more years of the same, led by the know-it-alls from Goldman, Rubin and Goldman fed. Maybe Obama does not have all the answers, or some of his aggressive measures might not work, but the public wants to hear something other than our leaders are worried, that they are symphathetic, etc., They want to hear someone who can inspire, lead, have some new thoughts, and hopefully get us out of this mess. If he can also create some spunk in the Treasury, fed, SEC and other so-called regulators, so much the better.

Posted by: Charles Hopfl | September 16, 2008 4:50 PM | Report abuse

no fun on a leftist site like this, but have to point out this spin gem - "workers" as fundamentals of u.s. economy.

are you kidding? fundamentals in any public econospeak means the process and state - which in the past 5 yrs of growth have been illusions built by massive deregulation on wall street, which mccain supported all the way.

i'd take a real fiscal conservative who'd kick these investment concerns in the #$@, or a real defense hawk willing to get us off opec and russia's nipple, in an instant over fussy barry.

gop, you're making us independents look like screaming liberals. you have real leaders, you just can't nominate them..

Posted by: sad. | September 16, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse


I don't consider myself a Republican OR Democrat or independent... I try to go with the best person for the job. I was seriously considering voting for Obama, but unfortunately, he wants to fix the economic situation by taking away my retirement money.

I can't approve of that so I may just have to vote for the lesser of two evils this time, as is usually the case as of late.
boB

Posted by: bgudgel | September 16, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

When McCain reaches out his hand, grins, and says, "My friends, Trust me." Check your wallet and your 401K value. ..............
http://thefiresidepost.com/2008/09/17/mccain-my-friends-trust-me/

Posted by: Ohg Rea Tone | September 16, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

Four more years of this can't be that bad, can it? The last 7.5 have been great for the economy.
Copper up 400%
Oats up 300%
Oil up 300%
Wheat up 300%
Soybeans up 160%
DJIA flat
Real wages down 4%
S&P 500 -8%
Nasdaq Composite -20%
Major investment banks down 60%

Posted by: joer | September 16, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

It is shameful for Obama trying to capitalize on any bad news for political gain. He offers no solution to any problem. He is worst politician for ages.

Posted by: God Father | September 16, 2008 4:44 PM | Report abuse

all these ridiculous comments being posted makes no difference and only widens the gap of progress

Posted by: Saddened | September 16, 2008 4:44 PM | Report abuse

Ackshully, thats not true. I saw in the papers how Larry Craig likes to have sex so I moved my feet in an airport bathroom and had great sex taht time two.

Chevy

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 4:43 PM | Report abuse

I like to drink lots of cheep beer and then have sex with my sister, becuz its the only way I kin hav sex.

Posted by: Chevy | September 16, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

It's hard to believe NObama is the best DEMS have to offer.

This wack can't complete a sentence.

I'm sure DEMS are on to this fool and see him now as nothing more then a community activist whose programs ended in failure.

Chevy

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 4:38 PM | Report abuse

Ahh, sweet Democrats - once again gleeful that something bad has befallen America. You really are a pack of winners. *very slow clapping*

Posted by: Rory | September 16, 2008 4:38 PM | Report abuse

scott32

I am in a different state yep you got the small town down to a t.

I can have compassion for people who make mistakes after all we all do. We do not get to choose our family history as in Bristol.

But when you put before me the same old chaos this is noy what I want in my leader.


Chaos theory is the self similar repeating infinitely larger and smaller ......... a fractal is a design coming from the edge of chaos a narrow range of numbers (-3 to 3) in a beautiful different design.

Who are the fractals of our time? Einstein? MLK JR? Gandhi? Mother Teresa?


Posted by: grandma | September 16, 2008 4:37 PM | Report abuse

Palin + lipstic = McCain ticket has a chance

Palin - lipstic = "Welcome to the whitehouse Mr. Obama"

Posted by: Response to... | September 16, 2008 4:36 PM | Report abuse

Wow...Palin is doing much better with the teleprompter.

God.

How painful.

Posted by: Losercuda | September 16, 2008 4:35 PM | Report abuse

MIDDLE CLASS AMERICANS ARE BECOMING POOR, BECAUSE GOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET SUPER RICH HAVE STOLEN OUR NATIONALTREASURY WEALTH THROUGH FRAUD SPECULATIONS

GOP Republican Wall Street Super Rich Are Emptying Our National Treasury To Give Each Other $10 Million Dollars Bonuses Every Year While Outsourcing Our American Jobs To Foreign Sweatshops. GOP Republicans lobby for no regulations to steal the United States National Wealth from the American People. This is not GOP Republican patriotism in the least, but treason.

GOP Republican McCentury D Student Super Greedy Rich Lobbyist McCain Wall Street OOIIILLLL Millionaire is a weak nominee who lacks the intelligence to receive the 3:00 am call.

Americans are tired of corruption from McBush and his Obscenely Super Rich Wall Street Robber Barons.
Stop Corporate Welfare.
Stop CEO Welfare.
Stop Millionaire Welfare.
Stop the rich from outsourcing American jobs.
Stop giving Golden Parachutes to the Rich for outsourcing American jobs.
Stop the Rich from using Our Public Offices for Private Ill Gotten Gains.
Stop the Rich from stealing Our National Treasury.
Stop the Rich from robbing Our National Treasury and raising the National debt.
Stop the Rich from Tax Avoidance and Tax Havens.
Stop the Rich from importing illegal drugs by the ton and destroying Our Country in the name of Wall Street high returns on investment.
Stop the Rich from eroding Our Constitutional Rights.
Stop the Rich (McBush, Cheney, Rice, D Student Super Greedy Rich Lobbyist McCain Wall Street OOIIILLLL Millionaire) from selling Our America to Saudi Arabia, China, India) in the name of outsourcing American jobs, selling American Banks, selling bulk shares of key American corporations.
Nationalize the American OOIIILLLL Industry for National Defense, if you love America.
America is not for sale now or ever.

Obscene Super capitalistic privileged C students with no business running hotdog stands illegally place themselves, their rich friends, and their rich family members into the highest positions of OUR COUNTRY to maintain, promote, and expand their ill gotten wealth at the expense of Average Americans. Do you still think that lieing GOP Republicans are patriots? I think not.

Greed and stupidity are destroying Our Country and it must stop.

America must get back to moral decency, family values, respect, honor, scholarship, and service to the general Public.

America is about Public Service and not private greed.

Change is happening and America, Europe and the World welcome cooperation.

Out with GOP Republican Wall Street Robber Barons.

In with the U.S. Constitution and the American People.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

We The People Are Voting For Harvard Scholar, Irish-American, and Constitution Law Professor Barack Obama.

D STUDENT SUPER GREEDY RICH LOBBYIST MCCAIN WALL STREET OOIIILLLL MILLIONAIRE-MCBUSH AND THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE (THE HAGUE) WILL HOLD MCBUSH, CHENEY AND RICE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ILLEGAL IRAQ WAR

The American People Have Been D Student Super Greedy Rich Lobbyist McCain Wall Street OOIIILLLL Millionaireed-McBushed-Hoodwinked-bushwhacked By the GOP Republican lobbyists party of liars

The GOP Republican Party has sold its soul in exchange for private Wall Street gains that have sent trillions of Our U.S. dollars overseas to sweatshops and tax havens at the expense of the American People. This blindly overzealous Las Vegas gambling style GOP Republican Wall Street greed, which is selling to the highest bidder Our Beautiful Country must stop. America doesn’t belong to the greedy GOP Republican Wall Street Banks. Our Beautiful America belongs with Americans. It’s time to get that straight.

The OOIIILLLL Crisis is a National Emergency that must be immediately Nationalized for National Defense. America must be saved by the American People. We’ve learned that America cannot rely on irresponsibly greedy GOP Republicans Wall Street Banks that have no loyalty to the American People. The greedy GOP Republicans are outsourcing American jobs to overseas sweatshops and sending trillions of Our U.S. dollars to overseas tax haven. These greedy GOP Republican acts are giving foreign governments and private billionaires a direct say and ownership in Our Country. The GOP Republicans are not patriots, but destroyers of the American Dream. We the People must take back Our Beautiful America Now.

International Court of Justice (The Hague) will question D Student Super Greedy Rich Lobbyist McCain Wall Street OOIIILLLL Millionaire-McBush-Cheney-Rice in January about their involvement in the Iraq War.

A long-delayed Senate committee report endorsed by Democrats and some GOP Republicans concluded that President McBush and his aides built the public case for war against Iraq by exaggerating available intelligence and by ignoring disagreements among spy agencies about Iraq’s weapons programs and Saddam Hussein’s links to Al Qaeda.

The report was released after years of partisan squabbling, and it represented the close of five years of investigations by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence into the use, abuse and faulty assessments of intelligence leading to the invasion of Iraq in March 2003.

That some McBush administration claims about the Iraqi threat turned out to be false is hardly new. But the report, based on a detailed review of public statements by Mr. McBush and other officials, was the most comprehensive effort to date to assess whether policy makers systematically painted a more dire picture about Iraq than was justified by the available intelligence.

The 170-page report accuses Mr. McBush, Vice President Dick Cheney and other top officials of repeatedly overstating the Iraqi threat in the emotional aftermath of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

In a statement accompanying the report the president and his advisers undertook a relentless public campaign in the aftermath of the attacks to use the war against Al Qaeda as a justification for overthrowing Saddam Hussein.

The report on the prewar statements found that on some important issues, most notably on what was believed to be Iraq’s nuclear, biological and chemical weapons programs, the public statements from Mr. McBush, Mr. Cheney and other senior officials were substantiated. The administration statements did not reflect the intelligence agencies’ uncertainties about the evidence or the disputes among them.

In a separate report the intelligence committee provided new details about a series of clandestine meetings in Rome and Paris between Pentagon officials and Iranian dissidents in 2001 and 2003. The meetings included discussions about possible covert actions to destabilize the government in Tehran, and were used by the Pentagon officials to glean information about rivalries in Iran and what was thought to be an Iranian hit team intending to attack American troops in Afghanistan.

The report criticized the meetings as ill advised and keeping the State Department and intelligence agencies in the dark about the meetings, which the report portrayed as part of a rogue intelligence operation.

The two reports were the final parts of the committee’s so-called Phase 2 investigation of prewar intelligence on Iraq and related issues. The first phase of the inquiry, begun in the summer of 2003 and completed in July 2004, identified grave faults in the C.I.A.’s analysis of the threat posed by Mr. Hussein.

The report on Iraq was especially critical of statements by the president and vice president linking Iraq to Al Qaeda and raising the possibility that Mr. Hussein might supply the terrorist group with unconventional weapons. Representing to the American people that the two had an operational partnership and posed a single, indistinguishable threat was fundamentally misleading and led the nation to war on false premises.

GOP Republicans on the committee sharply dissented from the report’s findings and suggested that the investigation was a partisan smoke screen to obscure the real story: that the C.I.A. failed the McBush administration by delivering intelligence assessments to policy makers that have since been discredited.

The report about the McBush administration’s public statements offers some new details about the intelligence information that was available to policy makers as they built a case for war. For instance, in September 2002 the defense secretary told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the Iraq problem cannot be solved by airstrikes alone, because Iraqi chemical and biological weapons were so deeply buried that they could not be penetrated by American bombs.

Two months later, however, the National Intelligence Council wrote an assessment concluding that the Iraqi underground weapons facilities identified by the intelligence agencies are vulnerable to conventional, precision-guided, penetrating munitions because they are not deeply buried.

Congress had never been told about the National Intelligence Council’s assessment.

International Court of Justice (The Hague in Europe) will question D Student Super Greedy Rich Lobbyist McCain Wall Street OOIIILLLL Millionaire-McBush-Cheney-Rice in January about their involvement in the Iraq War.

The OOIIILLLL Crisis is a National Emergency that must be immediately Nationalized for National Defense. America must be saved by the American People. We’ve learned that America cannot rely on irresponsibly greedy GOP Republicans Wall Street Banks that have no loyalty to the American People. The greedy GOP Republicans are outsourcing American jobs to overseas sweatshops and sending trillions of Our U.S. dollars to overseas tax haven. These greedy GOP Republican acts are giving foreign governments and private billionaires a direct say and ownership in Our Country. The GOP Republicans are not patriots, but destroyers of the American Dream. We the People must take back Our Beautiful America Now.

The American People Have Been D Student Super Greedy Rich Lobbyist McCain Wall Street OOIIILLLL Millionaireed-McBushed-Hoodwinked-Bushwhacked By the GOP Republican Lobbyists and Party of Liars.

America will restore it’s Constitution and closely regulate Criminal Wall Street GOP Republicans.

Your choice between a Harvard Law Scholar Obama of Harvard Law or Computer Illiterate D Student Super Greedy Rich Lobbyist McCain Wall Street OOIIILLLL Millionaire

Posted by: GOP Republican Wall Street Fraud Speculations | September 16, 2008 4:34 PM | Report abuse

Politico

September 15, 2008
Ben Smith

Obama campaign contests Taheri column

The Obama campaign is challenging Amir Taheri's column in today's New York Post, which says that during his visit to Iraq, Obama asked Iraqi leaders to postpone a final agreement on U.S. troops until the next administration takes office. Taheri reported:

While campaigning in public for a speedy withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.

According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July.

"He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington," Zebari said.

An Obama aide accused Taheri of confusing the Status of Forces agreement with a Strategic Framework Agreement, for which Obama has pushed for congressional review.

"This article bears as much resemblance to the truth as a McCain campaign commercial. Barack Obama has consistently called for any Strategic Framework Agreement to be submitted to the U.S. Congress so that the American people have the same opportunity for review as the Iraqi Parliament," said Obama spokeswoman Wendy Morigi. "Unlike John McCain, he supports a clear timetable to redeploy our troops that has the support of the Iraqi government. Barack Obama has never urged a delay in negotiations, nor has he urged a delay in immediately beginning a responsible drawdown of our combat brigades."

McCain aide Randy Scheunemann, however, attacked Obama based on the Post column.

“At this point, it is not yet clear what official American negotiations Senator Obama tried to undermine with Iraqi leaders, but the possibility of such actions is unprecedented. It should be concerning to all that he reportedly urged that the democratically-elected Iraqi government listen to him rather than the US administration in power," he said. "If news reports are accurate, this is an egregious act of political interference by a presidential candidate seeking political advantage overseas. Senator Obama needs to reveal what he said to Iraq's Foreign Minister during their closed door meeting. The charge that he sought to delay the withdrawal of Americans from Iraq raises serious questions about Senator Obama's judgment and it demands an explanation.”
_______________

Stay Tuned-

Posted by: Scott | September 16, 2008 4:33 PM | Report abuse

@clawerence -

Why do we ask? Because despite claiming that are for the average American, the reckless GOP policies have decimated the average American and yet the RePIGliKlans still manage to cobble together a slim majority of people who vote for those that don't have their best interests at heart.

Maybe they enjoy getting a$$ raped in Kansas by GOP fiscal policies. That might explain things better and clearer than clinging to guns and religion.

Posted by: Why Do We Ask? Because Republicans HATE JOE SIX PACK | September 16, 2008 4:33 PM | Report abuse

Obama should have said "you can put lipstick on a Bush - but it's still a Bush".

Read up on the Great Depression people. There were THREE Republican administrations leading up to the economic disaster that was the Great Depression. They deregulated everything and put in place policy after policy that benefited the wealthiest in the country. Sound familiar? The economy crashed due to the greed and lack of oversight. Who led the rebuilding of that economy? Franklin D. Roosevelt - a Democrat.

Posted by: MP | September 16, 2008 4:29 PM | Report abuse

To all of my GOP Loonie Friends out this afternoon on the Post Message Boards -- whether you are a paid poster or not, I would recommend you lose the "should have selected Hillary" garbage.

Numerous polls -- particularly in the swing states -- have pretty much debunked the hope that former Hillary supporters would flock to Governor Zero.

Now all you have is a breathtakingly unqualified 44 y/o zero and a really tired, worn-out 72 y/o at the top of the ticket.

Try the economy...that is such a strong suit of you all.

Oooops. No it isn't.

Posted by: Losercuda | September 16, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: dale | September 16, 2008 4:14 PM

If you'd read more, you may even learn who deregulated the market.

Posted by: germanguy | September 16, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse

I am an Obama supporter in Kasson, Minnesotta. When I was polled, I said I would vote for McCain.

The best information is disinformation. John McCain can keep counting on my vote. I can tell you he's in for a surprise on November 4th.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 4:22 PM | Report abuse

You are delusional, the Republicans would have had Hillary Clinton for Dinner and would not have stopped at "sexism" to do it.

Every " -gate" that Hillary was involved in would be at the top of their menu.

Talk about disrespect. Hillary would have been crucified by the GOP.

She would have really and TRUELY fired up their base. Do you not know how truely hateful the GOP is against the Clinton's?

Posted by: Ward6ForNow | September 16, 2008 4:18 PM

Probably the truest thing I've read on here today...

Posted by: scott032 | September 16, 2008 4:21 PM | Report abuse

I am surprised that the Democratic Party and their allies in the press don't get it - exactly how many times can you ask 'whats the matter with Kansas' or try and explain away the economic concerns of middle America as portraying them as fellow citizens who are 'clinging' to their religion, guns, fear of free-trade, or (I think the worse and most unfairly condesending description) 'antipathy toward those who don't look like them' - exactly how many times can you claim, while hob-knobing with Striesand and the Hollywood elite, that these rubes just don't get it.

Keep insult them. They know that their concerns are dismissed - that this guy, Obama, hasn't accomplished much of anything, much less with economic policy - other than getting a huge earmark for his wifes non-profit employer that pays her $300,000 plus for PR work - they got it.

And keep thinking you can explain away their distrust of Obama as racism, rather than justified concerns of handing over this nations economic, diplomatic, and military security to someone who simply doesn't merit it.

Posted by: clawrence | September 16, 2008 4:21 PM | Report abuse

I can't believe all the immature and racist comments I am reading on here. People wake up! Your futures depend on it. Either post intelligently or don't post at all. THIS ELECTION IS NOT A POPULARITY GAME. IT'S SERIOUS BUSINESS for the whole country.

Posted by: germanguy | September 16, 2008 4:21 PM | Report abuse

Now, I want to be clear and speak directly to those of you who LOVED that Palin interview. You're an idiot. I mean that. This is not one of those cases where we're going to agree to disagree. This isn't one of those situations where we debate it passionately and then walk away thinking that the other guy is wrong but argued well. I'm not going to think of you as a thoughtful but misguided person with different ideas who still really cares about the country and the world. No, sorry, not this time. This time, if you watched those interview excerpts and weren't scared out of your freakin' mind, then you're mentally ill, mentally disabled, or mentally disturbed. What you are NOT is responsible, informed, curious, thoughtful, mature, educated, empathetic, or remotely serious. I mean it.

But I like to think that anyone can change.

Stop voting for people you want to have a beer with. Stop voting for folksy. Stop voting for people who remind you of your neighbor. Stop voting for the ideologically intransigent, the staggeringly ignorant, and the blazingly incompetent.

Vote for someone smarter than you. Vote for someone who inspires you. Vote for someone who has not only traveled the world but who has also shown a deep understanding and compassion for it. The stakes are real and they're terrifyingly high. This election matters. It matters. It really matters. Let me say that one more time. This. Really. Matters.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-seitzman/sarah-palin-naked_b_125861.html

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 4:20 PM | Report abuse

Friends, compatriots, fellow-lamenters,
>> We are writing to you because of the fury and dread we have
>> felt since the announcement of Sarah Palin as the Vice-Presidential
>> candidate for the Republican Party. We believe that this terrible
>> decision has surpassed mere partisanship, and that it is a dangerous
>> farce in the part of a pandering and rudderless Presidential
>> candidate that has a real possibility of becoming fact.
>>
>> Perhaps like us, as American women, you share the fear of what Ms.
>> Palin and her professed beliefs and proven record could lead to for
>> ourselves and for our present or future daughters. To date, she is
>> against sex education, birth control, the pro-choice
>> platform, environmental protection, alternative energy
>> development, freedom of
>> speech (as mayor she wanted to ban books and attempted to fire),
>> the separation
>> of church and state, and polar bears. To say nothing of her complete
>> lack of real preparation to become the second-most-powerful person on
>> the planet.
>>
>> We want to clarify that we are not against Sarah Palin a a woman, a
>> mother, or, for that matter, a parent of a pregnant teenager, but
>> solely as a rash, incompetent, and all together
>> devastating choice for Vice President. Ms. Palin's political views
>> are in every way a slap in
>> the face to the accomplishments that our mothers and grandmothers
>> and great-grandmothers so fiercely fought for, and that we've so
>> demonstrably benefited from.
>> First and foremost, Ms. Palin does not represent us. She does not
>> demonstrate or uphold our interests as American women. It is
>> presumed that the inclusion of a woman on the Republican ticket
>> could win over women voters. We want to disagree, publicly.
>>
>> Therefore, we invite you to reply here witha short, succinct message
>> about why you, as a woman living in this country, do not support
>> this candidate as second-in-command for our nation.Please include
>> your name (last initial is fine), age, and
>> place of residence.
>>
>> We will post your responses on a blog called "Women
>> Against Sarah Palin,"which we intend to publicize as widely as
>> possible. Please
>> send us your reply at your earliest convenience?the greater the
>> volume
>> of responses we receive, the stronger our message will be.
>> Thank you for your time and action.
>> VIVA!
>> Sincerely,
>> womensaynopalin@gmail.com

Posted by: lndlouis@yahoo.com | September 16, 2008 4:19 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats always find a way to lose the presidential elections. This year is no different.

It is totally safe to have a winning Clinton/Obama ticket.

But, no, no, no, no, no. They don't want it. They want to have these "inspiring losers" on the ticket like the Obama/Biden ticket.

Just look at Minnesota. The latest poll had McCain and Obama tied at 45%. It's Minnesota! It Obama can not win Minnesota by double digits, he is heading into the biggest disaster this November called "Obama disaster."

Posted by: GY | September 16, 2008 4:10 PM

_______________________________________

You are delusional, the Republicans would have had Hillary Clinton for Dinner and would not have stopped at "sexism" to do it.

Every " -gate" that Hillary was involved in would be at the top of their menu.

Talk about disrespect. Hillary would have been crucified by the GOP.

She would have really and TRUELY fired up their base. Do you not know how truely hateful the GOP is against the Clinton's?

Posted by: Ward6ForNow | September 16, 2008 4:18 PM | Report abuse

I hear she has a new book coming out.

"The Idiots guide to raising crack heads".
That will be followed by
"Young stupid and pregnant in three easy steps"
sub title " You can have a dysfunctional also, just like mine"


FROM THE FOLKS WHO BROUGHT JOHN EDWARD'S, THEY NOW BRINGS YOU: "TRACK PALIN"
THE COKE HEAD WHO BEAT GOING TO JAIL BY GOING IN THE MILITARY AND HIS WONDERFUL PARENTS WHO RAISED SUCH A FINE FAMILY.


The NATIONAL ENQUIRER’S exclusive ongoing investigation of GOP VP Nom Sarah 'Barracuda' Palin’s goes far beyond a mere teen pregnancy crisis this week!

The Enquirer’s team of reporters has combed the Alaskan wilderness to discover the hidden truth about Gov. Palin’s family, which has become a central part of her political identity.

The ENQUIRER has learned exclusively that Sarah's oldest son, Track, was addicted to the power drug OxyContin for nearly the past two years, snorting it, eating it, smoking it and even injecting it. And as Track, 19, heads to Iraq as part of the U.S. armed forces, Sarah and her husband Todd were powerless to stop his wild antics, detailed in the new issue of The ENQUIRER, which goes on sale today.

THE ENQUIRER also has exclusive details about Track's use of other drugs, including cocaine, and his involvement in a notorious local vandalism incident.

“I’ve partied with him (Track) for years,” a source disclosed. “I’ve seen him snort cocaine, snort and smoke OxyContin, drink booze and smoke weed.”

The source also divulged the girls would do anything for Track and he’d use his local celebrity status to manipulate other guys “to get them to steal things he wanted.”

“He finally did what a lot of troubled kids here do,” the source divulged. “You join the military.”

And as Gov. Palin has billed the state of Alaska for various expenses related to her children, as reported by The Washington Post, The ENQUIRER's investigation reveals that she was so incensed by 17-year-old Bristol's pregnancy that she banished her daughter from the house.

Another family friend revealed pre-prego Bristol was as much of a hard partier as Track was.

“Bristol was a huge stoner and drinker. I’ve seen her smoke pot and get drunk and make out with so many guys. All the guys would brag that the just made out with Bristol.”

When Sarah found out the teen was pregnant by high schooler Levi Johnston, she was actually banished from the house. As part of the cover-up, Palin quickly transferred Bristol to another high school and made her move in with Sarah’s sister Heather 25 miles away!

And the ENQUIRER also learned that Levi Johnston, the baby mamma’s future wedded dada, who was glad handed by John McCain at the GOP Convention, isn’t too happy about his impending shotgun nups either.

“Levi got dragged out of the house to go to Minnesota,” Levi’s friend told The ENQUIRER. “Levi realizes he’s stuck being with Bristol because her mom is running for Vice President.”

The friend also confided that both Bristol and Levi “broke up a few times and they definitely messed around with other people.”

Meanwhile, as members of the Palin family’s war viciously over “Trooper-Gate” and claims of Sarah’s extramarital affair have turned the political race into a chaotic arena of threats, denials and vicious attacks by political black ops, The ENQUIRER has discovered shocking new details about the red-hot affair scandal!

For the full story of the secrets Sarah Palin is trying to hide – pick up the new ENQUIRER!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 4:18 PM | Report abuse

The Republicans and the economic policies that they subscribe to believe in deregulating business so as to help the economy grow. Which in theory sounds practical. But then again so did communism to the Russians.

The problem is greed, as businesses grow their leaders become more competitive (not bad) and they start to cut corners (bad) and then start to break laws (very bad). The example of that is in fact the crisis that is unfolding.

John McCain's good buddy Phil Gramm sponsored Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act which is in good part what has led us to todays mess (Gramm also is famous for the Enron Loophole that allowed for the Enron fiasco to happen). Gramm was, until recently one of McCain's economic advisers and remains one of his trusted friends.

Obama should be telling the American people that "our government is suppose to look after the welfare and well being of it's citizens as a whole and not a handful of corporations and mega-wealthy corporate types (Keating 5).

Regulation is not a business inhibitor as the Republicans (McCain included) have claimed it is a business stimulator, because if you can trust the companies you do business with you will do more business. The idea is about stimulating competitiveness not to favor a few multi-national corporations.

European multi-nationals are well regulated and they are eating our lunch (and buying our largest corporations).

Obama has to show America what his plan is for the path to recovery. And he needs to show America why the old GOP way is broken and why John McCain is not capable of making that change.

Posted by: rcc_2000 | September 16, 2008 4:16 PM | Report abuse

The FIRST thing B. Hussein Obama should do if he wants to "regain his momentum" is get him a decent looking woman like the other side's got. And don't blame the boy for his "lipstick on a pig" comment. He just plain dosen't know any better. What he was trying to say was "putting lipstick on a gorilla" like the one he's married to.
But, then again, Democrats are known for ugly or fat women, like that German Shepherd little Pretty Boy Edwards was laid up with and that fat little piglet under Billy Clinton's desk. The Republicans ALWAYS have better looking women. Maybe it's because they have more money, who knows. Maybe SIZE DOES COUNT with good looking women: the size of the WALLET that is. That would explain it.

Posted by: Percy Kution | September 16, 2008 4:16 PM | Report abuse

So now John W McCain claims he INVENTED THE BLACKBERRY!!!

Incredible. Sad to see what a doddering old clown he has become. He needs to get some mental health treatment...and soon.

Posted by: wilder5121 | September 16, 2008 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Forget Palin. She's history.

Hopefully, she will be able to stay Governor of Alaska, after McCain throws her under the bus...for Romney.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 4:15 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: germanguy | September 16, 2008 4:09 PM

ya but the question is, who was paid off? clinton started the housing market crunch and encouraged investments in the abuse of the bubble making hte bubble larger and longer lasting, but also making the pop that much more damaging.

take some time to research whose pockets are lined by this situation. barack obama has received one of the largest financial incentives from lehman brothers, mccain who has been in the senate for years hasnt even come close to the amount that obama received.

Posted by: dale | September 16, 2008 4:14 PM | Report abuse

Reading some of these posts it's obvious you hate Palincause she's all things you'll never be.

BTW fools NY yes that's New York, McCain now has a 5 point lead. SHOCKING!

Chevy

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 4:14 PM | Report abuse

Ah, AsperGirl! Obama is no angel, of course, as no politicians, especially those on the top, are. But Obama is smart and intelligent. Obama presents democrats, and democratic changes are badly needed now by the country. Obama can lead scientific oriented government much, much better than McCain/Palin can. And Global Warming and its implications are causing now devastation after devastation all over the country (over the world also, by the way). So, Obama would be elected. I understand that this country is deeply racist, but now it is the obvious and the direct suicide of the statehood to elect McCain/Palin. So, it won't happen. Make peace with the fact that Obama is the next USA president, as you, surely, can't change it.

Posted by: aepelbaum | September 16, 2008 4:13 PM | Report abuse

Carly Fiorina says McCain and Palin couldn't run a company. She should know, she couldn't either. She ran HP in the ground and the board canned her. You would think that Sarah Mooseburger would be the ideal incompetent that she would pick as her replacement.

Posted by: rbauer5 | September 16, 2008 4:13 PM | Report abuse

Just look at Minnesota. The latest poll had McCain and Obama tied at 45%. It's Minnesota! It Obama can not win Minnesota by double digits, he is heading into the biggest disaster this November called "Obama disaster."

Posted by: GY | September 16, 2008 4:10 PM

I'm sorry to contradict you, but Minnesota is NOT a clearly blue state. Minnesota has bucked the red-blue state classification for years (think Jesse Ventura for governor). It is not a surprise for Minnesota to be a dead heat. It's a purple state.

Posted by: scott032 | September 16, 2008 4:13 PM | Report abuse

Here is an example of McSame's ignorance of the big picture. This quote, above: "As president, McCain vowed, he would clean up the financial industry and penalize corporate executives who pile up losses and escape the wreckage on golden parachutes. "I promise you that on my watch, we are never going to let these kinds of abuses go uncorrected or unpunished," he said."

...isn't that what his top economic campaign adviser Carly Fiorina did at HP:

"On 9 February 2005, Carly Fiorina was dismissed as Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Hewlett-Packard.
Under Hewlett-Packard's severance agreement, Carly Fiorina received US$21 million in cash, which was 2.5 times her base annual salary."
ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carly_Fiorina

Wake up, people. This is just more of the same BS we've been spoon-fed for the last 8 years. We need Barack for a much needed blast of honesty and integrity to get this country back on moral high ground as a pertinent world leader.
Gobama!

Posted by: brian | September 16, 2008 4:11 PM | Report abuse


I have never seen a bigger group of uninformed racists than (most of) the republicans who are represented here in this thread. It makes me sick to my stomach to think that some of my “fellow Americans” actually believe the things they have stated here.
-Paul
______________

Paul, No, we're informed-

9-7-08 The Philadelphia Inquirer

The American Debate: It's little discussed, but Obama's race may be decider

By Dick Polman
Inquirer National Political Columnist
Let us swing the door ajar and invite the elephant into the room. One big reason Barack Obama is locked in a tight race, rather than easily outdistancing his opponent, is because he is black.
That factor is rarely discussed in polite political conversation. People tend to dance around it, talking instead about Obama's perceived inexperience, or his youth, or his perceived airs, or his liberal voting record. And racist sentiment rarely shows up in the polls, because a lot of people don't want to share their baser instincts with the pollsters; they'll save that instead for the privacy of the voting booth.
But the incremental evidence - anecdotal and even statistical - has become impossible to ignore.
Union organizers in the key state of Michigan complain in the press that, as one puts it, "we're all struggling to some extent with the problem of white workers who will not vote for Obama because of his color." An aging mine electrician from Kentucky is quoted as saying, "I won't vote for a colored man. He'll put too many coloreds in jobs." An elderly woman in a New Jersey hair salon is overheard complaining about Barack and Michelle Obama the other day, about how blacks supposedly have larger bones than whites, and about how she's fleeing America if Obama wins.
Jimmy Carter, while attending the Democratic convention, cited race as a "subterranean issue," yet at times this year it has been bared for all to see. Case in point, Pennsylvania. On the day of the Democratic presidential primary, 12 percent of the white Democratic voters told the exit pollsters that race mattered in their choice of candidate; of those whites, 76 percent chose Hillary Rodham Clinton over Obama. The same pattern surfaced in other states, including the key autumn state of Ohio.
This is worth pondering a moment longer. If 12 percent of Democratic voters are willing to tell exit pollsters, eye to eye, that race was an important factor, to Obama's detriment, isn't it fair to assume that the real percentage (including those who kept their sentiments private) was actually higher? And what might this portend for the general election, when the white electorate will be broader, and hence significantly less liberal, than in Democratic contests?
Here's one hint. Last June, the Washington Post-ABC News poll devised a "racial sensitivity index," based on a series of nuanced questions that were designed to measure the varying levels of racial prejudice in the white electorate. The pollsters came up with three categories, ranging from most to least enlightened. The key finding: Whites in the least-enlightened category - roughly 30 percent of the white electorate - favored John McCain over Obama by a ratio of 2-1.
A few prominent Democrats did broach this sensitive topic at the Denver convention. Dee Dee Myers, the former Bill Clinton aide, shared her concerns at one political forum, and with good reason. She worked for Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley in the 1980s, when it appeared that Bradley was a cinch to win his U.S. Senate contest despite his race. The final round of polls showed him winning comfortably. He lost.
"I lived through that," Myers said. "We're whistling past the graveyard if we think that race was not a factor in the Democratic primaries. Today's young voters will get us past these attitudes," but it will take time. As for millions of older voters, "they talk about having 'culture' problems [with Obama], but to separate culture from race is impossible."
And Markos Moulitsas, who runs the liberal Daily Kos blog, said: "It's human nature. A lot of people want to cling to the comfortable world that they've always lived in. The Obamas don't look like what First Families have always looked like. This will be one of the factors in the fall, because a lot of people simply want to stick with what they've known in the past."
The race obstacle is not necessarily fatal, of course, because in the end it may be trumped by other factors - such as McCain's age, or nagging concerns about handing the nuclear football in an emergency to a "hockey mom" as GOP vice presidential candidate whose chief national security credential is the proximity of Alaska to Russia.
But clearly Obama needs to tread carefully, arguably by stressing lunch-pail economic issues and continuing to present himself as a "post-racial" candidate. He will need to dispel these white suspicions, if only because whites will continue to dominate the electorate - they constituted 77 percent of all voters in 2004 - even if he manages to inspire an historic black turnout. He has to bond somehow with blue-collar whites, yet he cannot show too much passion, because, as Democratic strategist Joe Trippi explained to me, "those whites don't like to see a black guy getting angry, it's a dangerous thing for an African American candidate to do."
I'm not suggesting that racism would be the sole explanation for an Obama loss. Nor am I seeking to insult those who object to Obama purely on the issues. But if Obama winds up losing after having posted a seemingly solid polling lead on election eve, we may well find ourselves pondering the words of Henry David Thoreau, who wrote in 1854 that "public opinion is a weak tyrant, compared with our own private opinion."


Posted by: Al | September 16, 2008 4:11 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats always find a way to lose the presidential elections. This year is no different.

It is totally safe to have a winning Clinton/Obama ticket.

But, no, no, no, no, no. They don't want it. They want to have these "inspiring losers" on the ticket like the Obama/Biden ticket.

Just look at Minnesota. The latest poll had McCain and Obama tied at 45%. It's Minnesota! It Obama can not win Minnesota by double digits, he is heading into the biggest disaster this November called "Obama disaster."

Posted by: GY | September 16, 2008 4:10 PM | Report abuse

"McCain has shrewdly redefined the debate over change. Obama now must make the change argument in a way that plays most to the strengths and attributes he might bring to the presidency."

How did he do that?? McCain:'Guys, just forget about the past 8 years and how we got to where we are today, and go vote for another Republican! This time we've got a silver-spooned soccer mom with no experience instead of a silver-spooned cowboy with no experience.'

Obama's greatest strength is that he's not Republican. At this juncture, that's about the best change we can hope for.

Posted by: Terrorfied | September 16, 2008 4:10 PM | Report abuse

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that this is Bush's watch. He does have financial advisors on board, doesn't he? Why didn't they see the housing market problem sooner?

Picture this...

A house that is worth $24K jumps in value to $100K, in 5 years.

Tell me that the average person couldn't see that values were over-inflating? That we wouldn't have a bubble pop in the housing market? That banks wouldn't take advantage of average everyday people, who's dream was to own? That Real Estate salespeople didn't see an opportunity to make lots of money pushing ARM's. Banks didn't see the same benefit to dumping these loans on unsuspecting investors?

People wake up, Gramm pushed this with Bush's approval. Bush = Republican Party. McCain = Republican Party.

At this point, looking back at how this Republican Party Leadership has destroyed the best of what this country has to offer, I am inclined to take a 'chance' on Democratic Leadership. After all, we gave Bush two throws of the dice and we lost. I don't think McCain's roll will be any better, as long as it has to do with Republicans.

Everything I see and hear coming from the McCain campaign, tells me that this is just an old man with a dream to be president, bringing onboard a young chick to make his dream come true. We don't have the time to be speculating here. We need action. I personally feel, that with Obama's energy and drive, we can at least get a foot-hold again. After all, isn't this country on the brink of financial collapse? Besides, we can fire him in 4 years, if he doesn't live up to our expectations.

What's the worse that can happen? Bankrupcy of the United States!

Posted by: germanguy | September 16, 2008 4:09 PM | Report abuse

>>Truth teller wrote: "Obama "flips off" Hillary and then he smears Palin with his "lipstick on a pig" comment and you CAN'T UNDERSTAND WHY HE IS LOSING". People, many of us Hillary supporters, TOLD YOU that Obama was the wrong choice. He is a loose cannon, an immature hothead without the will, experience and knowledge to be President You had that person in Hillary and you BLEW IT."

He is just so trashy, it's unbelievable. LOL. The Democrats are so impressed with his affectations and airs that they don't see what a mean, trashy, narcissistic and low-class man he is personally.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 16, 2008 4:04 PM


................................................

Operation Chaos...here AsperGirl goes again!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 4:09 PM | Report abuse

Wheres the story Nobama behind America’s back was attempting to delay the return of America’s soldiers?

It’s all over the net and NO response from the NOBama camp

Once again NOBama proves he’s not the person he claims he is.

How dare him play politics with American lives.

Try him under the Logan act, and then string his sorry azz up.

Chevy

Posted by: Chevy | September 16, 2008 4:08 PM | Report abuse

Reminds me of an old joke:

Q:What do you call an African-American with PhD in Nuclear Physics?
A: A "n....r"

Q: What do you call a big n.....r with a switchblade?
A: Sir


Posted by: SAm | September 16, 2008 4:03 PM


.................................................

Wow. I know I've said commentary by racists for racists about other posts, but this one's even worse than my ever-intimidating racist friend with the 2X4 bobbiewick...

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 4:07 PM | Report abuse


McCain is using the old tired Washington ploy, namely calling for a commission. Commission for what, to study how those "fat cats", namely McCain contributors created this crisis. The largest contributor to McCains campaign is Merrill Lynch, one of those "fat cats" McCain is now blasting. And they're the ones going to bring change to Washington, they're the reformers???? They're the problem.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 4:06 PM | Report abuse

We obviously won't see comments like the one below in the Post, because of its obvious bias toward the democrats and the affirmative action candidate. Here is the Investors' Business Daily take on the roots of the crisis, with a comment about how Obama advisors took millions from Fannie May and Freddie Mac. Real clear democrat corruption in action. Do you really believe the rookie will change that???

The untold story in this whole national crisis is that President Clinton put on steroids the Community Redevelopment Act, a well-intended Carter-era law designed to encourage minority homeownership. And in so doing, he helped create the market for the risky subprime loans that he and Democrats now decry as not only greedy but "predatory."

Yes, the market was fueled by greed and overleveraging in the secondary market for subprimes, vis-a-vis mortgaged-backed securities traded on Wall Street. But the seed was planted in the '90s by Clinton and his social engineers. They were the political catalyst behind this slow-motion financial train wreck.

And it was the Clinton administration that mismanaged the quasi-governmental agencies that over the decades have come to manage the real estate market in America.

As soon as Clinton crony Franklin Delano Raines took the helm in 1999 at Fannie Mae, for example, he used it as his personal piggy bank, looting it for a total of almost $100 million in compensation by the time he left in early 2005 under an ethical cloud.

Other Clinton cronies, including Janet Reno aide Jamie Gorelick, padded their pockets to the tune of another $75 million.

Posted by: LarryG62 | September 16, 2008 4:06 PM | Report abuse

TARGETING OF AMERICAN CITIZENS BY GOVERNMENT AGENCIES:

A ROOT CAUSE OF THE MORTGAGE / CREDIT / WALL ST. MELTDOWN?

Victims of so-called "organized gang stalking" claim that multiple government agencies, including intelligence, law enforcement, and revenue collection agencies, have established a network of secret, extra-legal programs aimed at destroying the financial well-being of "targeted" individuals -- who are denied due process of law as their financial resources are systematically confiscated from them.

These programs allegedly involve the interception of mail; surveillance, interception and alteration of telecommunications, including telephone and internet communications; fabrication of bank, credit card, mortgage and billing statements; surreptitious manipulation of personal and business bank and mortgage accounts. This system apparently is an outgrowth of past controversial government programs such as Cointelpro and "Total Information Awareness."

In effect, a secret parallel system of transaction processing has been established for these persons, a system allegedly intended to destroy their capacity to earn a living and to support themselves and their families. These "mechanics of personal destruction" closely resemble the tactics employed by Nazi Germany in its campaign against the Jews and other targeted groups.

Victims charge that these programs also are designed to degrade their physical health, with health care professionals pressured by undercover agents to cooperate. Citizen vigilantes affiliated with government-funded community policing and "watch" groups are employed to harass and intimidate targeted persons, victims charge. These vigilantes are equipped with high-tech instruments capable of causing adverse health effects, victims have alleged.

Officials in the private sector know about some of these programs, it is alleged, since their cooperation is required to effect confiscatory transactions. Victims charge that the government is using national security and the "war on terror" as a pretext to secure the cooperation of corporations and businesses. But it is also possible that civilian overseers have been kept in the dark about the most nefarious of these programs.

The government takeover of more than half of the nation's mortgage market, and government supervision of failed investment houses such as Bear Stearns and Lehman Bros. help effectuate these programs of personal destruction, according to some of those who have been targeted.

These programs apparently have existed in one form or another for many years, but have become codified under the banner of the "war on terror" since the 9/11 terrorist attacks seven years ago, victims charge.

Victims of these "programs of personal destruction" are calling upon Congress to immediately convene hearings on these alleged unconstitutional, extra-legal abuses of power, which they say represent a great crime against humanity and a descent into a neo-fascist police state.

A mainstream media journalist who counts himself among the victims of these programs has written several articles on the subject of domestic terrorism and extra-legal targeting of American citizens:

TO: Mssrs. CHERTOFF, MUKASEY, PAULSON, GATES, McCONNELL, MUELLER

"GOV'T AGENCIES SUPPORT DOMESTIC TERRORISM"
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/government-agencies-support-domestic-torture-and-gang-stalking-says-noted-nowpublic-com-columnist
Gentlemen: What do you know about this, and what are you doing about it?

Posted by: scrivener | September 16, 2008 4:06 PM | Report abuse

>>Truth teller wrote: "Obama "flips off" Hillary and then he smears Palin with his "lipstick on a pig" comment and you CAN'T UNDERSTAND WHY HE IS LOSING". People, many of us Hillary supporters, TOLD YOU that Obama was the wrong choice. He is a loose cannon, an immature hothead without the will, experience and knowledge to be President You had that person in Hillary and you BLEW IT."

He is just so trashy, it's unbelievable. LOL. The Democrats are so impressed with his affectations and airs that they don't see what a mean, trashy, narcissistic and low-class man he is personally.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 16, 2008 4:04 PM | Report abuse

CNN's main concern about this financial crisis is how does it help Obama?!

Answer: Not at all.

It might help Mitt Romney if he were a candidate, but it provides no help for Obama since he has no economic expertise.

Obama's major economic achievements so far:

1. Getting the convicted corrupt crook Rezco to help finance the house he now lives in.
2. Allowing the terrorist Bill Ayers from the Weathermen Organization to organize fundraisers at his house for Obama's campaigns.


Posted by: BruceMcDougall | September 16, 2008 4:02 PM


...............................................

Um, yeah...got another nut job here! Get the med cart...

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 4:03 PM | Report abuse

Reminds me of an old joke:

Q:What do you call an African-American with PhD in Nuclear Physics?
A: A "n....r"

Q: What do you call a big n.....r with a switchblade?
A: Sir

Posted by: SAm | September 16, 2008 4:03 PM | Report abuse

Why is everyone dancing around the real issue? It's Barack Obama's race and that's why he is not riding high in the polls.

Posted by: Cathi | September 16, 2008 4:03 PM | Report abuse

Damn libs keep cummin on yourselves over an empty suit. Premature ejaculation happens and the suit gets soiled!
maybe you can learn to control yourseves someday-NO OBama NO way NO how NO...

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 4:03 PM | Report abuse

Some BUSH Doctrines :( as they come out in practice).Do McCain/Paline subscribe to these?
1. Don't tax big corporations and the wealthy. They will start more businesses or expand existing businesses. They will hire more workers and let the workers pay tax. Want examples remember Enron to Bear and Stones, to Lehman Brothers. When they are in any trouble because they mismanaged, bail them out at tax payers' expense [Ex: 30 Billion for Bear and Stones ($400 per family of four)]
2. Invade oil rich Iraq. Destroy all infrastructures; then award contracts with out bidding to H. Burtans. Spent 10Billion+ per month (Over $130 PM for a family of four).
3. Collaborate with dictators and alienate people of countries like Pakistan. Let the aids given to fight terrorists reach the hands of terrorists themselves. When people throw out dictator wonder what to do.

Posted by: Kuriakose Pulikeel | September 16, 2008 4:03 PM | Report abuse

CNN's main concern about this financial crisis is how does it help Obama?!

Answer: Not at all.

It might help Mitt Romney if he were a candidate, but it provides no help for Obama since he has no economic expertise.

Obama's major economic achievements so far:

1. Getting the convicted corrupt crook Rezco to help finance the house he now lives in.
2. Allowing the terrorist Bill Ayers from the Weathermen Organization to organize fundraisers at his house for Obama's campaigns.

Posted by: BruceMcDougall | September 16, 2008 4:02 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Truth Sleuth | September 16, 2008 4:02 PM | Report abuse

This can actually work both ways. some people may decide that Obama is too inexperienced and/or too liberal to deal with such a grave financial crisis. If you think about it, there is no way that Obama will be able to fund all his new proposed programs without raising taxes- and not just on people making over $250,000, there aren't that many of them to fund the Obama spending spree!

http://www.mccain08-hillary2012.blogspot.com/

Posted by: DCfred | September 16, 2008 4:01 PM | Report abuse

It's been a revelation to discover so many brothers and sisters, heartland Americans, who are equally excited at the prospect of a quality person like Sarah Palin in the mix.

She is heads above the other 3 in integrity, good judgment and the all important, bull dog factor! Go Sarah!

Posted by: rural americans | September 16, 2008 3:55 PM

This was obviously posted by someone who is not from rural America.

I grew up in a small town in Iowa and I can tell you that a woman like Governor Palin would not be popular where I came from. She would be called nasty names due to her ambition, she would be ridiculed for having a pregnant daughter and people would snicker and insinuate that she slept her way to the top and was little more than a "beauty queeen."

Is that right? No. But that's the way the rural America I know (and believe me, I know it only too well) would treat her.

Posted by: scott032 | September 16, 2008 4:00 PM | Report abuse

Looks like "The One" is seeking to SLOW his momentum - at least of withdrawing troops from Iraq. This fool is a traitor not only to his worshipers, but to the entire USA.

"OBAMA TRIED TO STALL GIS' IRAQ WITHDRAWAL
New York Post, by Amir Taheri
September 15, 2008

WHILE campaigning in public for a speedy withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.

According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July.

"He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington," Zebari said in an interview.

Obama insisted that Congress should be involved in negotiations on the status of US troops - and that it was in the interests of both sides not to have an agreement negotiated by the Bush administration in its "state of weakness and political confusion."

"However, as an Iraqi, I prefer to have a security agreement that regulates the activities of foreign troops, rather than keeping the matter open." Zebari says.

Though Obama claims the US presence is "illegal," he suddenly remembered that Americans troops were in Iraq within the legal framework of a UN mandate. His advice was that, rather than reach an accord with the "weakened Bush administration," Iraq should seek an extension of the UN mandate.

While in Iraq, Obama also tried to persuade the US commanders, including Gen. David Petraeus, to suggest a "realistic withdrawal date." They declined.

Obama has made many contradictory statements with regard to Iraq. His latest position is that US combat troops should be out by 2010. Yet his effort to delay an agreement would make that withdrawal deadline impossible to meet.

Supposing he wins, Obama's administration wouldn't be fully operational before February - and naming a new ambassador to Baghdad and forming a new negotiation team might take longer still.

By then, Iraq will be in the throes of its own campaign season. Judging by the past two elections, forming a new coalition government may then take three months. So the Iraqi negotiating team might not be in place until next June.

Then, judging by how long the current talks have taken, restarting the process from scratch would leave the two sides needing at least six months to come up with a draft accord. That puts us at May 2010 for when the draft might be submitted to the Iraqi parliament - which might well need another six months to pass it into law.

Thus, the 2010 deadline fixed by Obama is a meaningless concept, thrown in as a sop to his anti-war base.

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and the Bush administration have a more flexible timetable in mind.

According to Zebari, the envisaged time span is two or three years - departure in 2011 or 2012. That would let Iraq hold its next general election, the third since liberation, and resolve a number of domestic political issues.

Even then, the dates mentioned are only "notional," making the timing and the cadence of withdrawal conditional on realities on the ground as appreciated by both sides.

Iraqi leaders are divided over the US election. Iraqi President Jalal Talabani (whose party is a member of the Socialist International) sees Obama as "a man of the Left" - who, once elected, might change his opposition to Iraq's liberation. Indeed, say Talabani's advisers, 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.

Maliki's advisers have persuaded him that Obama will win - but the prime minister worries about the senator's "political debt to the anti-war lobby" - which is determined to transform Iraq into a disaster to prove that toppling Saddam Hussein was "the biggest strategic blunder in US history."

Other prominent Iraqi leaders, such as Vice President Adel Abdul-Mahdi and Kurdish regional President Massoud Barzani, believe that Sen. John McCain would show "a more realistic approach to Iraqi issues."

Obama has given Iraqis the impression that he doesn't want Iraq to appear anything like a success, let alone a victory, for America. The reason? He fears that the perception of US victory there might revive the Bush Doctrine of "pre-emptive" war - that is, removing a threat before it strikes at America.

Despite some usual equivocations on the subject, Obama rejects pre-emption as a legitimate form of self -defense. To be credible, his foreign-policy philosophy requires Iraq to be seen as a failure, a disaster, a quagmire, a pig with lipstick or any of the other apocalyptic adjectives used by the American defeat industry in the past five years.

Yet Iraq is doing much better than its friends hoped and its enemies feared. The UN mandate will be extended in December, and we may yet get an agreement on the status of forces before President Bush leaves the White House in January."

Posted by: PJ | September 16, 2008 3:59 PM | Report abuse

I have never seen a bigger group of uninformed racists than (most of) the republicans who are represented here in this thread. It makes me sick to my stomach to think that some of my “fellow Americans” actually believe the things they have stated here. The republican propaganda machine scares the hell out of me, because people seem to have evolved from using the lies as a campaign strategy to actually believing them. They have embraced negativity to the extent that they are willingly making self defeating choices. It seems as though their only real goal is to take everyone else down with them.

Posted by: Paul | September 16, 2008 3:59 PM | Report abuse

Obama has been speaking about the financial and economic crisis facing our country since last winter. It is the irresponsible media which has failed to report on this and prefers to wallow in the pig swill with the lying Republicans.

Obama's speech today was a strong compendium of specific solutions and astute analysis. His scorn for the hypocritical McCain was also right on point.

McCain's weak remarks today summed up his pallid response to all economic issues: he says he is against greed and corruption and yet he keeps a stable full of lobbyists in his "Straight Talk Express" to run his campaign. As an apologist for corrupt financial institutions as part of the Keating 5, McCain gained valuable insight into how to protect rich friends and profit from those connections.

Now McCain says that the "fundamentals of our economy are sound." Herbert Hoover has found a dangerous modern incarnation! McCain really is ignorant about economics and his judgment and temperament rule him out as president

Posted by: dee | September 16, 2008 3:58 PM | Report abuse

Pro-Woman: People like you are going to bring all life to an end in a spasm of overpopulation and resulting ecological catastrophe and nuclear war.

Read your Bible. It says be fruitful and multiply. Not multiply. Nor multiply and be fruitful.

We need fewer and better educated and supported children.

Posted by: mnjam | September 16, 2008 3:56 PM | Report abuse

We had Bill who left US with a surplus. Hillary who came with experience. The parties threw them out in favor of a do nothing Il. senator, and old hack, an old man and a Gov. who belives in creationism.
Meanwhile oil and wall street sharks are raping the country and we suffer.
Thanks liberal papers and folks for letting bush et.al. get away with it.
Hold folks responsible at the top, the way parents should be for their kids.

Posted by: Tom | September 16, 2008 3:56 PM | Report abuse

Laura,

I can't argue with your point that:

"John McCain is a sell-out and exposed he is just a typical Republican politician by picking Palin. He picked her to appease his base, poach Hillary votes and stoke a culture divide."

However, while I think that's cynical of Senator McCain, is it really wrong for him to look at the political landscape and pick the running-mate he felt was most likely to help deliver a victory?

Like it or not, that was his (and his party's) prerogative.

Posted by: scott032 | September 16, 2008 3:56 PM | Report abuse

SARAH,SARAH,SARAH-----------no to OBAMA BIN BIDEN

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:56 PM | Report abuse

It's been a revelation to discover so many brothers and sisters, heartland Americans, who are equally excited at the prospect of a quality person like Sarah Palin in the mix.

She is heads above the other 3 in integrity, good judgment and the all important, bull dog factor! Go Sarah!

Posted by: rural americans | September 16, 2008 3:55 PM | Report abuse

Obama "flips off" Hillary and then he smears Palin with his "lipstick on a pig" comment and you CAN'T UNDERSTAND WHY HE IS LOSING".

People, many of us Hillary supporters, TOLD YOU that Obama was the wrong choice. He is a loose cannon, an immature hothead without the will, experience and knowledge to be President You had that person in Hillary and you BLEW IT.

Evidently, Obama isn't the only person who is inside a bubble.


Posted by: Truth teller | September 16, 2008 3:54 PM | Report abuse

"The mystery of why Obama has not gained a greater advantage on the economy remains. I asked a veteran Democrat about this on Monday. "It baffles me," he said."
_______________________________________
9-7-08 The Philadelphia Inquirer

The American Debate: It's little discussed, but Obama's race may be decider

By Dick Polman
Inquirer National Political Columnist
Let us swing the door ajar and invite the elephant into the room. One big reason Barack Obama is locked in a tight race, rather than easily outdistancing his opponent, is because he is black.
That factor is rarely discussed in polite political conversation. People tend to dance around it, talking instead about Obama's perceived inexperience, or his youth, or his perceived airs, or his liberal voting record. And racist sentiment rarely shows up in the polls, because a lot of people don't want to share their baser instincts with the pollsters; they'll save that instead for the privacy of the voting booth.
But the incremental evidence - anecdotal and even statistical - has become impossible to ignore.
Union organizers in the key state of Michigan complain in the press that, as one puts it, "we're all struggling to some extent with the problem of white workers who will not vote for Obama because of his color." An aging mine electrician from Kentucky is quoted as saying, "I won't vote for a colored man. He'll put too many coloreds in jobs." An elderly woman in a New Jersey hair salon is overheard complaining about Barack and Michelle Obama the other day, about how blacks supposedly have larger bones than whites, and about how she's fleeing America if Obama wins.
Jimmy Carter, while attending the Democratic convention, cited race as a "subterranean issue," yet at times this year it has been bared for all to see. Case in point, Pennsylvania. On the day of the Democratic presidential primary, 12 percent of the white Democratic voters told the exit pollsters that race mattered in their choice of candidate; of those whites, 76 percent chose Hillary Rodham Clinton over Obama. The same pattern surfaced in other states, including the key autumn state of Ohio.
This is worth pondering a moment longer. If 12 percent of Democratic voters are willing to tell exit pollsters, eye to eye, that race was an important factor, to Obama's detriment, isn't it fair to assume that the real percentage (including those who kept their sentiments private) was actually higher? And what might this portend for the general election, when the white electorate will be broader, and hence significantly less liberal, than in Democratic contests?
Here's one hint. Last June, the Washington Post-ABC News poll devised a "racial sensitivity index," based on a series of nuanced questions that were designed to measure the varying levels of racial prejudice in the white electorate. The pollsters came up with three categories, ranging from most to least enlightened. The key finding: Whites in the least-enlightened category - roughly 30 percent of the white electorate - favored John McCain over Obama by a ratio of 2-1.
A few prominent Democrats did broach this sensitive topic at the Denver convention. Dee Dee Myers, the former Bill Clinton aide, shared her concerns at one political forum, and with good reason. She worked for Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley in the 1980s, when it appeared that Bradley was a cinch to win his U.S. Senate contest despite his race. The final round of polls showed him winning comfortably. He lost.
"I lived through that," Myers said. "We're whistling past the graveyard if we think that race was not a factor in the Democratic primaries. Today's young voters will get us past these attitudes," but it will take time. As for millions of older voters, "they talk about having 'culture' problems [with Obama], but to separate culture from race is impossible."
And Markos Moulitsas, who runs the liberal Daily Kos blog, said: "It's human nature. A lot of people want to cling to the comfortable world that they've always lived in. The Obamas don't look like what First Families have always looked like. This will be one of the factors in the fall, because a lot of people simply want to stick with what they've known in the past."
The race obstacle is not necessarily fatal, of course, because in the end it may be trumped by other factors - such as McCain's age, or nagging concerns about handing the nuclear football in an emergency to a "hockey mom" as GOP vice presidential candidate whose chief national security credential is the proximity of Alaska to Russia.
But clearly Obama needs to tread carefully, arguably by stressing lunch-pail economic issues and continuing to present himself as a "post-racial" candidate. He will need to dispel these white suspicions, if only because whites will continue to dominate the electorate - they constituted 77 percent of all voters in 2004 - even if he manages to inspire an historic black turnout. He has to bond somehow with blue-collar whites, yet he cannot show too much passion, because, as Democratic strategist Joe Trippi explained to me, "those whites don't like to see a black guy getting angry, it's a dangerous thing for an African American candidate to do."
I'm not suggesting that racism would be the sole explanation for an Obama loss. Nor am I seeking to insult those who object to Obama purely on the issues. But if Obama winds up losing after having posted a seemingly solid polling lead on election eve, we may well find ourselves pondering the words of Henry David Thoreau, who wrote in 1854 that "public opinion is a weak tyrant, compared with our own private opinion."

Posted by: Al | September 16, 2008 3:54 PM | Report abuse

John McCain knows that people are hurting (some of his servants' friends have probably lost their homes and taken to squatting in his unused mansions), but he doesn't think there is an underlying problem. He also wants to gamble Americans' retirement insurance in the stock market that crashed yesterday. McCainomics: Running up the debt to cut the McCains' taxes.

Posted by: Aleks | September 16, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

The root of the financial meltdown are Republican fiscal policies -- give huge tax breaks to the rich, in the hopes they will build factories.

The net result is a low savings and investment economy in which (1) the "rich" lend their money, via hedge funds, to suckers who sign up for NINJA loans, (2) in which household savings are ZERO, (3) in which fixed business investment declines, even as corporate profits soar, because businesses have nothing to invest in, and (4) in which the federal government runs gigantic deficits year after year which can only be repaid in the end by selling off bi g chunks of this country to foreigners. Indeed, to the extent purchasers of subprime bonds were foreigners, and it is a big extent, we were selling off our housing stock to them.

Republicans: deficits, defeat and decline.

Posted by: mnjam | September 16, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

Reproductive Rights?

What about the female child in the womb. Science not faith tells us that from conception she is a distinct person from her parents and given a nurturing environement will grow.

Maybe we should define life first because Obama doesn't even think it begins after birth.

There is nothing more anti-woman than abortion. Why do you think China aborts more females than males?

Posted by: Pro-Woman | September 16, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

Laura - Stop reading the "liberal media's" views about Obama and you may possibly just see the real side of him

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

My mom was a hockey mom.

She wasn't a pit bull, a liar or a con artist.
She was a ''reformed Republican.'' She had a brain.

Not half a brain like those buying into this Palin Project, while America is coming apart at the seams. The closest thing I've ever witnessed to "a mountain being removed and be thou cast into the sea" is Lehman Bros.

Mom was more like a smart Golden Retriever. She was loyal, kind and looked out for the common person with deep compassion. She volunteered her time to those less fortunate; in the late 60's Mom taught and tutored underprivileged kids of a different race. I went with her, remembering how we had to lock the car doors once we entered into that neighborhood.

She went to church, but didn't wave her hands to the sky during the service like some lunatic. Mom taught us to beware of a wacko.

Pit bulls are the most dangerous, vicious dogs on the planet. I know dogs and I know people.

And Sarah Palin, you are no Golden Retriever

Posted by: TruthWalksOnWater | September 16, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

"So, R's are just upset that Obama makes 'em feel stupid, and if he'd just dumb his rhetoric down to bumper-sticker nuggets, they'd vote for him"

It was those vapid, bumper-sticker nuggets that have cause a lot of us Democrats to take a vacation from the party.

Posted by: bobbiewick | September 16, 2008 3:50 PM


...........................................................

Operation Chaos...ENGAGED AGAIN!

Please call Rush and tell him we've had lift-off...so we'll be as high as he is...

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

I don't know about REgain... were I am in Pennsylvania we are all still voting for BARACK OBAMA!

Posted by: Scott | September 16, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON ANGERED BY SARAH PALIN’S REMARKS

Comments Uttered by Sarah Palin Has Angered Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton Described Sarah Palin As An Opportunistic Bar Fly Who She Will Squash.

Comments Uttered by Sarah Palin Has Angered Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton Described Sarah Palin As An Opportunistic Bar Fly Who She Will Squash.

Comments Uttered by Sarah Palin Has Angered Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton Described Sarah Palin As An Opportunistic Bar Fly Who She Will Squash.


National Organization of Women (NOW) Endorses Obama / Biden For Their Pro-Women Rights Stance


McCain / Palin are rejected for their anti-women stance and votes against Women Rights

PALIN RETURNED HOME TO 2,000 ALASKAN PROTESTERS WHO CHEERFULLY CHANTED "O-BAM-AH.

Gov. Sarah Palin returned home to 2,000 protesters outside the Anchorage library who wanted to correct the widespread impression that the Last Frontier endorses her candidacy.

"Last week this was just ten women sitting around talking about this perception that all of Alaska supports Sarah Palin. We apparently hit a nerve and started a movement,"

A sense of festival obtained. There was a woman in a polar bear suit representing "Polar Bear Moms Say: No Palin." Drivers on 36th Avenue saw a little girl waving a sign "Don't Ban My Books."

"My mom is from Alaska. She's a working mother. She's good looking," said Nolan. "So she seems to be qualified to be vice president."


Sarah Palin Protesters Held Signs Reading:

Bush In A Skirt
Palin She Be Failin
Jesus Was a Community Organizer
Palin: Thanks But No Thanks
Smearing Alaska's Good Name One Scandal @ a Time
Candidate To Nowhere
Rape Kits Should Be Free
Voted For Her Once: Never Again!
Community Organizers are the Real Patriots
Barbies for War
I Shall Not Be Pandered To
Give Palin Your Vote AND Your Draft Age Child
Sarah Palin: So Far Right She's Wrong
Alaska Is Not Frisco
Coat Hangers for McCain
Sarah Palin, Undoing 150 Years of American Feminism
Hockey Mama for Obama (on a hockey stick)


Cheerful chants of "O-bam-ah.


National Organization of Women (NOW) Endorses Obama / Biden For Their Pro-Women Rights Stance


McCain / Palin are rejected for their anti-women stance and votes against Women Rights


PRESIDENTIAL AND VICE PRESIDENTIAL CHOICES

I'm a little confused. Let me see if I have this straight.....

If you grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents, you're 'exotic, different.'

Grow up in Alaska eating mooseburgers, and its a quintessential American story.

If your name is Barack you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.

Name your kids Willow, Trig and Track, you're a maverick.

Graduate from Harvard law School and you are unstable.

Attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you're well grounded.

If you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer,
become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review,
create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters,
spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor,
spend 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people,
become chairman of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee,
spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of 13
million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign
Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees,
you don't have any real leadership experience.

If your total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years
on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less
than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000
people, then you're qualified to become the country's second
highest ranking executive.

If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising 2 beautiful daughters,
all within Protestant churches, you're not a real Christian.

If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress,
and left your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month,
you're a Christian.

If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including
the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.

If , while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only,
with no other option in sex education in your state's school system
while your unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant , you're very responsible.

If your wife is a Harvard graduate lawyer who gave up a position in a prestigious law firm
to work for the betterment of her inner city community, then gave that up to raise a family,
your family's values don't represent America's.

If you're husband is nicknamed 'First Dude', with at least one DWI conviction
and no college education, who didn't register to vote until age 25 and
once was a member of a group that advocated: the secession of Alaska from the USA,
your family is extremely admirable.

OK, much clearer now.


National Organization of Women (NOW) Endorses Obama / Biden For Their Pro-Women Rights Stance


McCain / Palin are rejected for their anti-women stance and votes against Women Rights


BRITISH PRIME MINISTER BROWN SUPPORTS BARACK OBAMA

LONDON - BRITISH PRIME MINISTER GORDON BROWN voiced support for UNITED STATES DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE BARACK OBAMA, saying he would help Americans struggling with an economic downturn.

In a move seen by some British media as a break with a political convention requiring foreign leaders to remain neutral ahead of US elections, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER BROWN praised MR. OBAMA as a fellow “progressive politician” who would help ordinary Americans in tough times. With eight weeks to go before the presidential election, MR. OBAMA and his Republican rival John McCain are neck-and-neck in domestic opinion polls.

BRITISH PRIME MINISTER BROWN described the race for the White House as “electrifying” and said: “It is the DEMOCRATS who are generating the ideas to help people through more difficult times.”

“To help prevent people from losing their home, BARACK OBAMA has proposed a Foreclosure Prevention Fund to increase emergency pre-foreclosure counselling, and help families facing repossession,” he wrote in an article in The Monitor magazine, a monthly political publication.

Posted by: Hillary Clinton Angered By Sarah Palin's Remarks | September 16, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

How could McCain treat our economic woes? He has trouble even accepting consistently that the system is broken, and his proposed commission -- punting big problems as far as possible into the future -- is a confession that he is clueless as to what to do about people's hurting today.

Posted by: Time for a change | September 16, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

* If you grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents, you're
"exotic, different."
* If you grow up in Alaska eating moose burgers, you're a
quintessential American story.

* If your name is Barack, you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.
* If you name your kids Willow, Trig and Track, you're a maverick.

* If you graduate from Harvard law School, you are unstable.
* If you attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you're
well grounded.

* If you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer, become the
first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter
registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as
a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State Senator
representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman of
the state Senate's Health and Human S ervices committee, spend 4 years
in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people
while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs,
Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees, you
don't have any real leadership experience.
* If your total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the city
council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000 people,
20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people, then
you're qualified to become the country's second highest ranking
executive.

* If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising
2 beautiful daughters, all within Protestant churches, you're not a
real Christian.
* If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your
disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a
Christian.

* If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, includin g
the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.
* If, while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no
other option in sex education in your state's school system, while your
unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant , you're very responsible.

* If your wife is a Harvard graduate lawyer who gave up a position in a
prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city
community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family's values
don't represent America's.
* If you're husband is nicknamed "First Dude", with at least one DWI
conviction and no college education, who didn't register to vote until
age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession of
Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:51 PM | Report abuse

Hard-working American families are anxiously trying to make sense of yesterday's disastrous economic headlines.

While they're trying to figure out just how hard the news will hit them and their savings, John McCain's advice seems to be: don't worry about it.

Right after a major global investment bank declared bankruptcy, and in the middle of the second-biggest Dow Jones drop this century, McCain told an audience in Florida that "the fundamentals of our economy are strong."

How can the fundamentals of our economy be strong when, just this year, 600,000 Americans have lost their jobs? When people are losing their homes? When health insurance is beyond the reach of an ever increasing number of Americans?

John McCain clearly doesn't get it.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:51 PM | Report abuse

To the Republican sheep:

McCain voted along the party lines more than 90% of the time IN THE COURSE OF ALMOST 30 *$&&*$ YEARS!This is the party that's DESTROYING America.

Obama voted 97% of the time with the party that SAVES AMERICA'S ASS, EVERY TIME REPUBLICANS AND THEIR PERVERSE NOTION OF CAPITALISM DRIVE THE COUNTRY INTO A DITCH!.

Now, why WOULDN'T he vote with such a party 97% of the time?

Posted by: Sam | September 16, 2008 3:51 PM | Report abuse

It seems a strange time for this to happen. I smell a rat here. It seems that the dems are the reason for the bank failures. They seen Obama is in trouble and pushed Lehman out of business. Al Gore said many times "the economy doesn't matter" The dems are willing to lose a war to win an election. The dems are willing to crash the economy and destroy lives to win an election. It's all about power.

Posted by: Chance | September 16, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

John McCain is a sell-out and exposed he is just a typical Republican politician by picking Palin. He picked her to appease his base, poach Hillary votes and stoke a culture divide. Even Britain and Europe know Obama is the better candidate.

The only people who don’t get it are the brainwashed right-wing puppets who think that just because someone has a speech draw and likes to fish that somehow makes politicians just like them or the best candidate to run the government. I like Tina Fey too, that doesn’t mean she should run the country. Are we really this foolish? Palin wasn’t the best or most qualified, it’s because mcCain knew she would be a draw to small town America whom they are duping (Sara Palin ain’t like you, folks).

How is this being a "maverick"? How is it ‘Country First”? How is this “I rather win a war than loose an election”? I’ll say it again, John McCain is a sell-out. Obama said it pretty accurately too - Lipstick on a pig, is still a pig.

The most important metric for picking a VP is they are ready to step in from day one. His judgment is reckless and he gambled at our expense. The mere fact Palin is being educated on foreign policy and is avoiding the press indicates she wasn’t prepared on day one. She is running for the second highest office, but can’t answer questions from the press or public? This doesn’t alarm anyone?

I lost all my respect for John McCain. He's not the hero today he was 35 years ago. McCain is nothing without Palin.

What does it say about a campaign that has to "mimic" what and whom Obama is, not to mention hijack Obamas core message of Change from day one just to poach votes? Is that all they view Obama as, a "product" a "formula", a “personality”? It makes McCain look weak and more importantly, the American people stupid if they fall for it.

Now all these puppets are willing to just get behind her without even knowing anything about her and try to convince the American public she is prepared to be VP or President? Not even uncertain objectiveness, caution, pause or question just because she has an "R" in front of her name? How can anyone make a honest, clear determination reasonably in less than 60 days.

Bravo America! We look like complete idiots once again while the world watches. I am truly embarrassed of my country. I guess all isn’t lost, at least many will have Palin’s eye glass frames while our country crumbles economically. We are such tools.

If Palin/McCain win I'm leaving this country. I’m not paying for a war that should have never happened or failed Bush policies any more than I already have.

British Prime Minister Backs Obama
http://waugh.standard.co.uk/2008/09/brown-backs-oba.htm

World wants Obama
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/09/2360240.htm?section=world

Posted by: Laura | September 16, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

"So, R's are just upset that Obama makes 'em feel stupid, and if he'd just dumb his rhetoric down to bumper-sticker nuggets, they'd vote for him"

It was those vapid, bumper-sticker nuggets that have cause a lot of us Democrats to take a vacation from the party.

Posted by: bobbiewick | September 16, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Now that all of Palin's claim to fame have been debunked I hope people snap out of there spell with her.

1. She is not the earmark reformer she claimed but quite the contrary.

2. She never sold a plane on ebay for a profit. She sold it for a loss privately.

3. She only was against the bridge to nowhere once it became unfavorable; buy still kept and spent the earmark money.

4. She doesn’t have a grasp of complex issues such as health care reform, economics, foreign policy, etc.

5. She is a radical right-wing extremist
She is the worst VP candidate we have ever had.

Posted by: Laura | September 16, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

"See, it's largely composed of morons like yourself who deserve nothing better than the GOP."

You should have been more serious about factoring Hillraiser and me into your plans when you shoved Mister Wonderful's candidacy down our throats. Now that a loss to the GOP is inevitable, you've nobody but yourselves to blame.

Posted by: bobbiewick | September 16, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

McCain is an "expert" when it comes to 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."


*McCain - 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.


MCCAIN/PALIN - LIARS!

http://www.realchange.org/mccain.htm
.

Posted by: Bush + McCain = "W"orthless | September 16, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

To call a parent of a Downs Syndrome child '" Lipstick on a pig" is even worse than racism, IT IS DESPICABLE.

YOU ARE A DEVIL OBAMA.SHAME ON YOU.

BEWARE OF THE BOOK OF LIFE GOD WILL OPEN FOR YOU IN PURGATORY.

Posted by: OBAMALOOSA | September 16, 2008 3:43 PM

.............................................

They have meds to help with this type of hysteria. Please seek medical help.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:48 PM | Report abuse

I say we nominate Ted Nugent next election.. He'll fix this damn country

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:48 PM | Report abuse

So, R's are just upset that Obama makes 'em feel stupid, and if he'd just dumb his rhetoric down to bumper-sticker nuggets, they'd vote for him, bobbiewick? Obama, are you listening? God knows it's not because of racist trolls.
BillW: One-man nation of whiners.

Posted by: TheWind | September 16, 2008 3:48 PM | Report abuse

Wow! Never have I seen so many people so eager to expose their ignorance. The financial market problems shouldn't be a political issue other than to mention the irresponsible home buyers that bought homes they knew they couldn't afford. The move by congress to bail out all of those buyers started this domino effect. No one party is responsible.

Posted by: Ancient Texan | September 16, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

You see, while Barack Obama is faking outrage over all the bankruptcies and bailouts, he doesn’t mention that a number of his top ten contributors are from Wall Street, including Goldman Sacs, Lehman and the JP Morgan Chase. He also fails to mention that one of the first subprime lenders to stick it to borrowers and have her bank seized is a woman named Penny Pritzker, who just happens to be Barack Obama’s campaign Finance Chair (as confirmed on April 3, 2008) and a potential Secretary of the Treasury in an Obama administration.

Posted by: nancy | September 16, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Want to know who is to blame?
FOLLOW THE MONEY

THIS POST IS WORTH REPEATING:

It was the DEMOCRATS that pushed for legislation to ease the financial markets. The Democrats wanted to ease the mortgage guidelines so it would be easier for low income borrowers to get a home. How would they pay the loan back was not an issue the Democrats concerned themselves with.
Additionally, OBAMA took over $100,000 in PAC money from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, making him the THIRD top recipient for receiving this PAC money. The top or first recipient was the actual HEAD OF THE BANKING COMMITTEE, the one that was suppose to regulate them and oversee them for the taxpayer, and this was DEMOCRAT Senator Chris Dodd. He took in excess of $135,000.

The TOP 5 recipients were ALL Democrats:
1) Dodd 2) Kerry 3) OBAMA "I don't take lobby money" 4) H Clinton 5) Kanjorski

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Sorry Reps, you had your 8 years.

You F'ed things up not just for us, but for the rest of the world with you backwords-ideology.

The mere fact you still support your party after what Bush did is disgraceful. Your sell-outs! Your sheep! bahhhhhhh!

Posted by: kim | September 16, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

This election is going to be decided by the unwashed millions who are going to get up on November 4th and see that even though we are fighting hopeless wars in far away lands we have not suffered a major terrorist attack in this country in seven years – maybe someone did something right. The millions will see that even though the economy sucks, gas prices are falling – and even though some Wall Street fat cats are getting their butts kicked maybe they are finally getting what they deserve. The millions will see that even though we haven’t had Mr. IQ200 in the White House for eight years, we’re still doing alright – maybe being first in your class at school isn’t as important as being first in the minds of the people. Then the millions are going to wander down to the voting place and vote just like they did in 2000 and 2004. Then they’ll go home and check the TV guide to see if there’s anything good on – besides all that political crap that's been on for two straight years that nobody really cares about anyway (“...will ‘American Idol’ still be on tonight?)...

Posted by: hariseldonsr | September 16, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

"Only little men use hate speak and threatening words"

I'm not a man, One-Inch Richard, I am a woman. And only cowards hurl insults at strangers whom they disagree with, instead of conducting an ad rem, euphemism-free discussion about Obama's chances of winning the election.

Posted by: bobbiewick | September 16, 2008 3:43 PM

............................................

My mistake. I didn't mean to demean your womanly disposition after your threats of violence with a 2X4...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Any American suggesting we combine with Canada has to be a liberal... Aye!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

The magic N E G R O has nothing to offer but constant whinning and moaning about how bad this country is. Hey Obama, how about showing us some success as a politician, ANYTHING!

Imagine no liberals, what a wonderful world it would be!

Posted by: Toxic Avenger | September 16, 2008 3:46 PM | Report abuse

isn't it great to live in a country where we can debate, argue and diss political figures openly?

regardless of who gets in, we're still SOL for the next 4 years, because apparently not even Wall Street knows how Wall Street works!

Posted by: gotta love the USA | September 16, 2008 3:45 PM | Report abuse

Hillraiser,

It's not the Dems who have a problem, it's America that has a problem.
See, it's largely composed of morons like yourself who deserve nothing better than the GOP.

Americans should really consider splitting teh country in two. Stop playing the unity B.S. game. Your Civil War will never be over and guess who's winning? Hint: not the critical thinkers.

Perhaps the progressive half of the former USA could join up with Canada to form one great North American super-state where capitalism is properly collared, muzzled and generally well-behaved.

Posted by: Sam | September 16, 2008 3:44 PM | Report abuse

"the Palin/McCain ideology supported 90% of his policies! FACT FACT FACT."

Get the FACTS straight.

McCain voted with his party 90% of the time, not because George Bush voted that way!

Obama voted with the Democrats 97% of the time.

So, who is more apt to change Washington? What is really needed is a change in CONGRESS. Ratings of the Democratically controlled Congress is FAR below GW Bush's rating.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

Bush has been a disaster for our economy and military. If the Democrats can't take McCain, their party needs to disband.

Posted by: DonH | September 16, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

"Only little men use hate speak and threatening words"

I'm not a man, One-Inch Richard, I am a woman. And only cowards hurl insults at strangers whom they disagree with, instead of conducting an ad rem, euphemism-free discussion about Obama's chances of winning the election.

Posted by: bobbiewick | September 16, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

To call a parent of a Downs Syndrome child '" Lipstick on a pig" is even worse than racism, IT IS DESPICABLE.

YOU ARE A DEVIL OBAMA.SHAME ON YOU.

BEWARE OF THE BOOK OF LIFE GOD WILL OPEN FOR YOU IN PURGATORY.

Posted by: OBAMALOOSA | September 16, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

You can put lipstick on Obama and He's still clueless....

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

McCain isn't a maverick and never has been.

Regulate the financial industry? McCain wants limited government, which usually means less regulation. "Free businesses from regulation and we all do better".

Well, what's good for one business is not necessarily what is good for the country. For over 100 years, businesses from Standard Oil to Enron and Lehman Brothers have consistently demonstrated that a lack of regulation leads to disaster.

Posted by: Doug | September 16, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

>Obama references are almost always positive or at worst, neutral. McCain references are rarely even neutral and nearly always negative.

Thats because Obama is smart and McCain is a sell-out liar.

Posted by: Sue | September 16, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

You see, while Barack Obama is faking outrage over all the bankruptcies and bailouts, he doesn’t mention that a number of his top ten contributors are from Wall Street, including Goldman Sacs, Lehman and the JP Morgan Chase. He also fails to mention that one of the first subprime lenders to stick it to borrowers and have her bank seized is a woman named Penny Pritzker, who just happens to be Barack Obama’s campaign Finance Chair (as confirmed on April 3, 2008) and a potential Secretary of the Treasury in an Obama administration.

Posted by: nancy sabet | September 16, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

BillW Wrote:
[Anonymous:
"No one would let Obama run an ice cream stand"

All he's ever "run" is his mouth. He needs to go to Kenya and assist his relatives.]

Wow! The true colors of the Right comes out. This guy really doesn't represent either Party, people. He doesn't even represent his own. A first grader has more sense than this guy. And he votes! Geez.

Posted by: Westerner | September 16, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

Lipstick on a pig is still a pig.

Posted by: Laura | September 16, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

It has been so interesting looking at the headlines from various media outlets on my Google page. Obama references are almost always positive or at worst, neutral. McCain references are rarely even neutral and nearly always negative. It's my first election to be in the US since Clinton Bush in 1992 - the media bias is not even subtle any more. I wish the two candidates could just be put in a room with a camera and mike for 3 hours and allowed to chat with each other about their differing visions. Fat chance. More sound bites from them, out of context ads, and ad nauseum media "analysis". Someday we'll end up with a Putin for president because Americans will be too tired to put up with this nonsense. A shame.

Posted by: Jim | September 16, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

"Sorry, it was her jewelry that jacked up the price tag to $300,000."

Vanity Fair -- the original source of this nonsense -- admitted it didn't know how much Cindy's jewelry cost, or whether it was even rea.

Posted by: bobbiewick | September 16, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

HOW? Americans are much smarter than Obama, and obviosly most news journalist that make these coments.

It was the DEMOCRATS that pushed for legislation to ease the financial markets. The Democrats wanted to ease the mortgage guidelines so it would be easier for low income borrowers to get a home. How would they pay the loan back was not an issue the Democrats concerned themselves with.
Additionally, OBAMA took over $100,000 in PAC money from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, making him the THIRD top recipient for receiving this PAC money. The top or first recipient was the actual HEAD OF THE BANKING COMMITTEE, the one that was suppose to regulate them and oversee them for the taxpayer, and this was DEMOCRAT Senator Chris Dodd. He took in excess of $135,000.
The TOP 5 recipients were ALL Democrats:
1) Dodd 2) Kerry 3) OBAMA "I don't take lobby money" 4) H Clinton 5) Kanjorski

We thought we had some problems in this country so we turned it over to the Democrats in the majority, and this is what they gave us! Not only do we NOT need Obama, the inexperienced jack of no trade, we do not need the Democrats in the majority. They slapped the American taxpayor in the face and it is still stinging.

Posted by: Obama and the Economy - NO! | September 16, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

Jim - Obama wants to take our right to bear arms and turn us into Canada... Hey, come to think of it, we'll have the same health care program.... Wonderful!!!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

on McCain cleaning up his remarks
"I clearly meant what I should have said,...my friends"

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

"I forgot to attribute to bobbiewick earlier. More analysis by racists for racists..."

I guess it's easy (as well as cowardly) to label people you don't know as "racists" -- and other nasty epithets -- when they're not in a position to retaliate in a way that would be meaningful to you. If I were standing beside you with a two-by-four, I just you'd be a lot more polite.


Posted by: bobbiewick | September 16, 2008 3:38 PM

............................................

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Only little men use hate speak and threatening words.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

What does Obama know--nothing!!!!! The only thing obama is doing now is saying what ever he wants. McCain is aways wrong no matter what hesays or stands for. Attack attack attack with no bases- Obama -- what a pig!

Posted by: Cal | September 16, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

The foolishness of americans is believing that just because the costume and mask is different, that somehow the Palin/McCain ideology will be different than Bush.

They supported 90% of his policies! FACT FACT FACT. Now all of a sudden McCain is diifferent. Please, it's proposerous and insulting to defend.

You want to vote conservative or Republican because thats your team, great, but don't try and sell non-sense. Lipstick on a Pig is still a pig.

Posted by: rachel | September 16, 2008 3:39 PM | Report abuse

I posted this elsewhere and many seem to be reposting the same info over and over but I have questions? I do not know the answers.


Is the crime rate higher in areas with more gun control? Why did we have the right to bear arms in the first place? Why didn't Hitler invade Switzerland? Is the crime rate lower in areas with less gun control? I am not referring to the rape and incest in Alaska.

Who produces the most food? Who produces the most oil? Do we really have wheat rotting on barges?

Why is our government borrowing its own money from the federal reserve? Don't we actually own the fed reserve? If not who does? Didn't we have a gold standard?


Are taxes even legal in the first place? Don't corporations only pay taxes on their profits? If so wouldn't this mean if after cost of doing business, huge wages for the CEO, they still have billions in profits ....... the profit could be paid as a wage to all of the remaining employees at the bottom and therefore no profit would exist? Hence no tax?

Who looses money if we develop hydrogen powered cars? Who gains? The technology is there, is the distribution system? Before any one has a cow or two think about what are you made from? water? and water is?


What about phyto mining? Can it really be done?
http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/pr/2000/000622.htm

It was fun ready all the bull for a few days. I have children and grandchildren. I remember when not everyone had an allergy. My drinking water was clean.

Do you know when the over 5000 chemicals used in cosmetics like say lip stick are used in the petroleum industry are disposed of they have to be labeled toxic / hazardous? CDC has lots of info on the toxic waste we beautify our bodies with .... did I say lip stick, toxic. Don't know about you but this scares me.

Posted by: grandma | September 16, 2008 3:39 PM | Report abuse

The muck is getting thick.

I am starting to lose track of who said what. Both candidates have lost it. Neither one knows what to say in light of the financial market turmoil. Probably because neither one really understands how our financial system works!

Posted by: Rick F | September 16, 2008 3:38 PM | Report abuse

"I forgot to attribute to bobbiewick earlier. More analysis by racists for racists..."

I guess it's easy (as well as cowardly) to label people you don't know as "racists" -- and other nasty epithets -- when they're not in a position to retaliate in a way that would be meaningful to you. If I were standing beside you with a two-by-four, I just you'd be a lot more polite.

Posted by: bobbiewick | September 16, 2008 3:38 PM | Report abuse

I am amused by the folks who are clearly right-leaning discussing Senator Obama's decision to not tab Senator Clinton for VP. Seriously folks, there was no way that was going to happen, and it would not have been useful to tab her. If Senator Clinton were on the ticket the right-wingers would have said that Obama was spineless and would have been dragging all the old Clinton scandals out right now.

That's nothing more than a feint to try to paint their agenda as more "pro-woman" despite thier long-time anti-woman policies on pay and reproductive rights.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:37 PM | Report abuse

LISTEN TO THE VOICE OF REASONING!! THIS GUY IS BRILLIANT!!
Remarks of Senator Barack Obama—as Prepared for delivery Confronting an Economic Crisis Tuesday, September 16th, 2008 Golden, Colorado Over the last few days, we have seen clearly what’s at stake in this election. The news from Wall Street has shaken the American people’s faith in our economy. The situation with Lehman Brothers and other financial institutions is the latest in a wave of crises that have generated tremendous uncertainty about the future of our financial markets. This is a major threat to our economy and its ability to create good-paying jobs and help working Americans pay their bills, save for their future, and make their mortgage payments.
Since this turmoil began over a year ago, the housing market has collapsed. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had to be effectively taken over by the government. Three of America’s five largest investment banks failed or have been sold off in distress. Yesterday, Wall Street suffered its worst losses since just after 9/11. We are in the most serious financial crisis in generations. Yet Senator McCain stood up yesterday and said that the fundamentals of the economy are strong
A few hours later, his campaign sent him back out to clean up his remarks, and he tried to explain himself again this morning by saying that what he meant was that American workers are strong. But we know that Senator McCain meant what he said the first time, because he has said it over and over again throughout this campaign – no fewer than 16 times, according to one independent count.
Now I certainly don’t fault Senator McCain for all of the problems we’re facing, but I do fault the economic philosophy he subscribes to. Because the truth is, what Senator McCain said yesterday fits with the same economic philosophy that he’s had for 26 years. It’s the philosophy that says we should give more and more to those with the most and hope that prosperity trickles down. It’s the philosophy that says even common-sense regulations are unnecessary and unwise. It’s a philosophy that lets Washington lobbyists shred consumer protections and distort our economy so it works for the special interests instead of working people.
We’ve had this philosophy for eight years. We know the results. You feel it in your own lives. Jobs have disappeared, and peoples’ life savings have been put at risk. Millions of families face foreclosure, and millions more have seen their home values plummet. The cost of everything from gas to groceries to health care has gone up, while the dream of a college education for our kids and a secure and dignified retirement for our seniors is slipping away. These are the struggles that Americans are facing. This is the pain that has now trickled up.
So let’s be clear: what we’ve seen the last few days is nothing less than the final verdict on an economic philosophy that has completely failed. And I am running for President of the United States because the dreams of the American people must not be endangered any more. It’s time to put an end to a broken system in Washington that is breaking the American economy. It’s time for change that makes a real difference in your lives.
If you want to understand the difference between how Senator McCain and I would govern as President, you can start by taking a look at how we’ve responded to this crisis. Because Senator McCain’s approach was the same as the Bush Administration’s: support ideological policies that made the crisis more likely; do nothing as the crisis hits; and then scramble as the whole thing collapses. My approach has been to try to prevent this turmoil.
In February of 2006, I introduced legislation to stop mortgage transactions that promoted fraud, risk or abuse. A year later, before the crisis hit, I warned Secretary Paulson and Chairman Bernanke about the risks of mounting foreclosures and urged them to bring together all the stakeholders to find solutions to the subprime mortgage meltdown. Senator McCain did nothing.
Last September, I stood up at NASDAQ and said it’s time to realize that we are in this together – that there is no dividing line between Wall Street and Main Street – and warned of a growing loss of trust in our capital markets. Months later, Senator McCain told a newspaper that he’d love to give them a solution to the mortgage crisis, “but” – he said – “I don’t know one.”
In January, I outlined a plan to help revive our faltering economy, which formed the basis for a bipartisan stimulus package that passed the Congress. Senator McCain used the crisis as an excuse to push a so-called stimulus plan that offered another huge and permanent corporate tax cut, including $4 billion for the big oil companies, but no immediate help for workers.
This March, in the wake of the Bear Stearns bailout, I called for a new, 21st century regulatory framework to restore accountability, transparency, and trust in our financial markets. Just a few weeks earlier, Senator McCain made it clear where he stands: “I’m always for less regulation,” he said, and referred to himself as “fundamentally a deregulator.”
This is what happens when you confuse the free market with a free license to let special interests take whatever they can get, however they can get it. This is what happens when you see seven years of incomes falling for the average worker while Wall Street is booming, and declare – as Senator McCain did earlier this year – that we’ve made great progress economically under George Bush. That is how you can reach the conclusion – as late as yesterday – that the fundamentals of the economy are strong.
Well, we have a different way of measuring the fundamentals of our economy. We know that the fundamentals that we use to measure economic strength are whether we are living up to that fundamental promise that has made this country great –that America is a place where you can make it if you try.
Americans have always pursued our dreams within a free market that has been the engine of our progress. It’s a market that has created a prosperity that is the envy of the world, and rewarded the innovators and risk-takers who have made America a beacon of science, and technology, and discovery. But the American economy has worked in large part because we have guided the market’s invisible hand with a higher principle – that America prospers when all Americans can prosper. That is why we have put in place rules of the road to make competition fair, and open, and honest.
Too often, over the last quarter century, we have lost this sense of shared prosperity. And this has not happened by accident. It’s because of decisions made in boardrooms, on trading floors and in Washington. We failed to guard against practices that all too often rewarded financial manipulation instead of productivity and sound business practices. We let the special interests put their thumbs on the economic scales. The result has been a distorted market that creates bubbles instead of steady, sustainable growth; a market that favors Wall Street over Main Street, but ends up hurting both.
Let me be clear: the American economy does not stand still, and neither should the rules that govern it. The evolution of industries often warrants regulatory reform - to foster competition, lower prices, or replace outdated oversight structures. Old institutions cannot adequately oversee new practices. Old rules may not fit the roads where our economy is leading. But instead of sensible reform that rewarded success and freed the creative forces of the market, too often we’ve excused an ethic of greed, corner-cutting and inside dealing that threatens the long-term stability of our economic system.
It happened in the 1980s, when we loosened restrictions on Savings and Loans and appointed regulators who ignored even these weaker rules. Too many S&Ls took advantage of the lax rules set by Washington to gamble that they could make big money in speculative real estate. Confident of their clout in Washington, they made hundreds of billions in bad loans, knowing that if they lost money, the government would bail them out. And they were right. The gambles did not pay off, our economy went into recession, and the taxpayers ended up footing the bill. Sound familiar? And it has happened again during this decade, in part because of how we deregulated the financial services sector. After we repealed outmoded rules instead of updating them, we were left overseeing 21st century innovation with 20th century regulations. When subprime mortgage lending took a reckless and unsustainable turn, a patchwork of regulators systematically and deliberately eliminated the regulations protecting the American people and failed to raise warning flags that could have protected investors and the pensions American workers count on.
This was not the invisible hand of the market at work. These cycles of bubble and bust were symptoms of the ideology that my opponent is running to continue. John McCain has spent decades in Washington supporting financial institutions instead of their customers. In fact, one of the biggest proponents of deregulation in the financial sector is Phil Gramm – the same man who helped write John McCain’s economic plan; the same man who said that we’re going through a ‘mental recession’; and the same man who called the United States of America a “nation of whiners.” So it’s hard to understand how Senator McCain is going to get us out of this crisis by doing the same things with the same old players.
Make no mistake: my opponent is running for four more years of policies that will throw the economy further out of balance. His outrage at Wall Street would be more convincing if he wasn’t offering them more tax cuts. His call for fiscal responsibility would be believable if he wasn’t for more tax cuts for the Wealthiest Americans, and more of a trillion dollar war in Iraq paid for with deficit spending and borrowing from foreign creditors like China. His newfound support for regulation bears no resemblance to his scornful attitude towards oversight and enforcement. John McCain cannot be trusted to reestablish proper oversight of our financial markets for one simple reason: he has shown time and again that he does not believe in it.
What has happened these last eight years is not some historical anomaly, so we know what to expect if we try these policies for another four. When lobbyists run your campaign, the special interests end up gaming the system. When the White House is hostile to any kind of oversight, corporations cut corners and consumers pay the price. When regulators are chosen for their disdain for regulation and we gut their ability to enforce the law, then the interests of the American people are not protected. It’s an ideology that intentionally breeds incompetence in Washington and irresponsibility on Wall Street, and it’s time to turn the page.
Just today, Senator McCain offered up the oldest Washington stunt in the book – you pass the buck to a commission to study the problem. But here’s the thing – this isn’t 9/11. We know how we got into this mess. What we need now is leadership that gets us out. I’ll provide it, John McCain won’t, and that’s the choice for the American people in this election.
History shows us that there is no substitute for presidential leadership in a time of economic crisis. FDR and Harry Truman didn’t put their heads in the sand, or hand accountability over to a Commission. Bill Clinton didn’t put off hard choices. They led, and that’s what I will do. My priority as President will be the stability of the American economy and the prosperity of the American people. And I will make sure that our response focuses on middle class Americans – not the companies that created the problem.
To get out of this crisis – and to ensure that we are not doomed to repeat a cycle of bubble and bust again and again – we must take immediate measures to create jobs and continue to address the housing crisis; we must build a 21st century regulatory framework, and we must pursue a bold opportunity agenda that creates new jobs and grows the American economy.
To jumpstart job creation, I have proposed a $50 billion Emergency Economic Plan that would save 1 million jobs by rebuilding our infrastructure, repairing our schools, and helping our states and localities avoid damaging budget cuts.
I worked with leaders in Congress to create a new FHA Housing Security Program, which will help stabilize the housing market and allow Americans facing foreclosure to keep their homes at rates they can afford. Going forward, we need to replace Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as we know them with a structure that is focused on helping people buy homes – not engaging in market speculation. We can’t have a situation like the old S&L scandal where its “heads” investors win, and “tails” taxpayers lose. That’s going to take ending the lobbyist-driven dominance of these institutions that we’ve seen for far too long in Washington.
To prevent fraud in the mortgage market, I’ve proposed tough penalties on fraudulent lenders, and a Home Score system that will ensure consumers fully understand mortgage offers and whether they’ll be able to make payments. To help low- and middle-income families, I will ease the burden on struggling homeowners through a universal homeowner’s tax credit. This will add up to a 10 percent break off the mortgage interest rate for 10 million households. That’s another $500 each year for many middle class families.
Unlike Senator McCain, I will change our bankruptcy laws to make it easier for families to stay in their homes. Right now, if you’re a family that owns one house, bankruptcy judges are actually barred from helping you keep a roof over your head by writing down the value of your mortgage. If you own seven homes, the judge is free to write down any or all of the debt on your second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth or seventh homes. Now that may be of comfort to Senator McCain, but that’s the kind of out-of-touch Washington loophole that makes no sense. When I’m President, we’ll make our laws work for working people.
But as we’ve seen the last few days, the crisis in our financial markets now reaches well beyond the housing market. That’s why it’s time to do what I called for last September and again this past March – and it is only more overdue today.
Our capital markets cannot succeed without the public’s trust. It’s time to get serious about regulatory oversight, and that’s what I will do as President. That starts with the core principles for reform that I discussed at Cooper Union.
First, if you’re a financial institution that can borrow from the government, you should be subject to government oversight and supervision. When the Federal Reserve steps in as a lender of last resort, it is providing an insurance policy underwritten by the American taxpayer. In return, taxpayers have every right to expect that financial institutions with access to that credit are not taking excessive risks.
Second, we must reform requirements on all regulated financial institutions. We must strengthen capital requirements, particularly for complex financial instruments like some of the mortgage securities and other derivatives at the center of our current crisis. We must develop and rigorously manage liquidity risk. We must investigate rating agencies and potential conflicts of interest with the people they are rating. And we must establish transparency requirements that demand full disclosure by financial institutions to shareholders and counterparties. As we reform our regulatory system at home, we must address the same problems abroad so that financial institutions around the world are subject to similar rules of the road.
Third, we need to streamline our regulatory agencies. Our overlapping and competing regulatory agencies cannot oversee the large and complex institutions that dominate the financial landscape. Different institutions compete in multiple markets - Washington should not pretend otherwise. A streamlined system will provide better oversight and reduce costs.
Fourth, we need to regulate institutions for what they do, not what they are. Over the last few years, commercial banks and thrift institutions were subject to guidelines on subprime mortgages that did not apply to mortgage brokers and companies. This regulatory framework failed to protect homeowners, and made no sense for our financial system. When it comes to protecting the American people, it should make no difference what kind of institution they are dealing with. Fifth, we must crack down on trading activity that crosses the line to market Manipulation. The last six months have shown that this remains a serious problem in many markets and becomes especially problematic during moments of great financial turmoil. We cannot embrace the administration’s vision of turning over the protection of investors to the industries themselves. We need regulators that actually enforce the rules instead of overlooking them. The SEC should investigate and punish market manipulation, and report its conclusions to Congress.
Sixth, we must establish a process that identifies systemic risks to the financial system like the crisis that has overtaken our economy. Too often, we end up where we are today: dealing with threats to the financial system that weren’t anticipated by regulators. We need a standing financial market advisory group to meet regularly and provide advice to the President, Congress, and regulators on the state of our financial markets and the risks they face. It’s time to anticipate risks before they erupt into a full-blown crisis.
These six principles should guide the legal reforms needed to establish a 21st century regulatory system. But the change we need goes beyond laws and regulation. Financial institutions must do a better job at managing risks. There is something wrong when boards of directors or senior managers don’t understand the implications of the risks assumed by their own institutions. It’s time to realign incentives and CEO compensation packages, so that both high level executives and employees better serve the interests of shareholders.
Finally, the American people must be able to trust that their government is looking out for all of us - not the special interests that have set the agenda in Washington for eight years, and the lobbyists who run John McCain’s campaign.
I’ve spent my career taking on lobbyists and their money, and I’ve won. If you wanted a special favor in Illinois, there was actually a law that let you give campaign cash to politicians for their own personal use. In the State House, they called it business-as-usual. I called it legalized bribery, and while it didn’t make me the most popular guy in Springfield, I put an end to it.
When I got to Washington, we saw some of the worst corruption since Watergate. I led the fight for reform in my party, and let me tell you – not everyone in my party was too happy about it. When I proposed forcing lobbyists to disclose who they’re raising money from and who in Congress they’re funneling it to, I had a few choice words directed my way on the floor of the Senate. But we got it done, and we banned gifts from lobbyists, and free rides on their fancy jets. And I am the only candidate who can say that Washington lobbyists do not fund my campaign, they will not run my White House, and they will not drown out the voices of the American people when I am President of the United States. That’s how we’re going to end the outrage of special interests tipping the scales. The most important thing we must do is restore opportunity for all Americans. To get our economy growing, we need to recapture that fundamental American promise. That if you work hard, you can pay the bills. That if you get sick, you won’t go bankrupt. That your kids can get a good education, and that we can leave a legacy of greater opportunity to future generations.
That’s the change the American people need. While Senator McCain likes to talk about change these days, his economic program offers nothing but more of the same. The American people need more than change as a slogan– we need change that makes a real difference in your life.
Change means a tax code that doesn’t reward the lobbyists who wrote it, but the American workers and small businesses who deserve it. I will stop giving tax breaks to corporations that ship jobs overseas, and I will start giving them to companies that create good jobs right here in America. I will eliminate capital gains taxes for small businesses and start-ups – that’s how we’ll grow our economy and create the high-wage, high-tech jobs of tomorrow.
I will cut taxes – cut taxes – for 95% of all working families. My opponent doesn’t want you to know this, but under my plan, tax rates will actually be less than they were under Ronald Reagan. If you make less than $250,000 a year, you will not see your taxes increase one single dime. In fact, I offer three times the tax relief for middle-class families as Senator McCain does – because in an economy like this, the last thing we should do is raise taxes on the middle-class.
I will finally keep the promise of affordable, accessible health care for every single American. If you have health care, my plan will lower your premiums. If you don’t, you’ll be able to get the same kind of coverage that members of Congress give themselves. And I will stop insurance companies from discriminating against those who are sick and need care the most
I will create the jobs of the future by transforming our energy economy. We’ll tap our natural gas reserves, invest in clean coal technology, and find ways to safely harness nuclear power. I’ll help our auto companies re-tool, so that the fuel-efficient cars of the future are built right here in America. I’ll make it easier for the American people to afford these new cars. And I’ll invest 150 billion dollars over the next decade in affordable, renewable sources of energy – wind power and solar power and the next generation of biofuels; an investment that will lead to new industries and five million new jobs that pay well and can’t ever be outsourced
And now is the time to finally meet our moral obligation to provide every child a world-class education, because it will take nothing less to compete in the global economy. I’ll recruit an army of new teachers, and pay them higher salaries and give them more support. But in exchange, I will ask for higher standards and more accountability. And we will keep our promise to every young American – if you commit to serving your community or your country, we will make sure you can afford a college education.
This is the change we need – the kind of bottom up growth and innovation that will advance the American economy by advancing the dreams of all Americans.
Times are hard. I will not pretend that the changes we need will come without cost – though I have presented ways we can achieve these changes in a fiscally responsible way. I know that we’ll have to overcome our doubts and divisions and the determined opposition of powerful special interests before we can truly reform a broken economy and advance opportunity.
But I am running for President because we simply cannot afford four more years of an economic philosophy that works for Wall Street instead of Main Street, and ends up devastating both.
I don’t want to wake up in four years to find that more Americans fell out of the middle-class, and more families lost their savings. I don’t want to see that our country failed to invest in our ability to compete, our children’s future was mortgaged on another mountain of debt, and our financial markets failed to find a firmer footing.
This time – this election – is our chance to stand up and say: enough is enough!
We can do this because Americans have done this before. Time and again, we’ve battled back from adversity by recognizing that common stake that we have in each other’s success. That’s why our economy hasn’t just been the world’s greatest wealth generator – it’s bound America together, it’s created jobs, and it’s made the dream of opportunity a reality for generation after generation of Americans.
Now it falls to us. And I need you to make it happen. If you want the next four years looking just like the last eight, then I am not your candidate. But if you want real change – if you want an economy that rewards work, and that works for Main Street and Wall Street; if you want tax relief for the middle class and millions of new jobs; if you want health care you can afford and education so that our kids can compete; then I ask you to knock on some doors, and make some calls, and talk to your neighbors, and give me your vote on November 4th. And if you do, I promise you – we will win Colorado, we will win this election, and we will change America together.

Posted by: obama | September 16, 2008 3:19 PM


Posted by: braggingrights! | September 16, 2008 3:37 PM | Report abuse

McCain Wants to Jail Rape Victims for Abortions

Posted by: jim | September 16, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

JUST SAY NO TO OBAMA BIN BIDEN!

Posted by: Pablo | September 16, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

The only economists that ever suggested that more government regulation and more government spending would help the economy are now either working in France, Cuba, or the Obama campaign.

Posted by: Regulation to help the economy | September 16, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

slavin... get a grip.

do you have tickets to the $28,000 a ticket fundraiser in hollywood tonight? dude! who is fighting for you? a guy who can't use a computer because typing is painful due to the vietnamese breaking his arms? or some community organizer that has as much experience as me (not much!)

Posted by: to slavin | September 16, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

"WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT "THE ISSUES"?

I have not seen or heard anything about that?

Posted by: azkmb | September 16, 2008 3:32 PM"
------
Go to his website, they are laid out in detail.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

"Cindy's dress cost $3000, NOT $300,000."

Thanks for the correction. Not grossly obscene then ... just more than the value of my car and entire wardrobe. Sorry, it was her jewelry that jacked up the price tag to $300,000.

Posted by: slavin | September 16, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

hey billw:
Go ahead and vote for McHoover and when you can't make the payments on your trailer just remember not to whine, just squeal like a pig!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

"....nor is Cindy going to sell off her $300,000 convention dress ..."

Cindy's dress cost $3000, NOT $300,000.
You really shouldn't get your information from Huffington. She is the worlds biggest, most mendacious, fascist.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:33 PM | Report abuse

What's the matter billw, don't have a response? or are you still trying to wrap your head around the facts of my reply?

well do you, well do you cowboy?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:33 PM | Report abuse

>So the surprise won't be how many unexpected votes Obama gets; it will be how many voters who tell pollsters they will vote for Obama who in the privacy of the voting booth will pull the lever for McCain instead.

This make absolutly no sense. Do you say your for McCain when really your for Obama? If anything, they wouldn't take the poll to begin with.

Posted by: Jo | September 16, 2008 3:32 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous... The US consumes 20 million barrels of oil a day, yet it only produces 9. By producing oil and selling it anywhere other than OPEC (of which the US is not a member), it will drive oil prices down. We will never see $1 a gallon gas, but at least the bulk of the money will stay in the US, and not to countries that want to see us annihilated.

Posted by: to Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:32 PM | Report abuse

Obama,

I will figure out what McCain is saying on my own. I do not need your help. UNDERSTAND?

WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT "THE ISSUES"?

I have not seen or heard anything about that?

Posted by: azkmb | September 16, 2008 3:32 PM | Report abuse

"If he picked Hillary, there would be no lost momentum and it would have been a done deal."

Picking Hillary would have helped. And I agree that shutting Hillary out was a big fumble for the DNC, which will need to be overhauled after the debacle that faces them in November.

Posted by: bobbiewick | September 16, 2008 3:31 PM | Report abuse

We're going to end up living in Hooverville under President McSame since he's not going to offer any of his 9 homes to anyone, nor is Cindy going to sell off her $300,000 convention dress to donate the proceeds to poor people.

Posted by: slavin | September 16, 2008 3:31 PM | Report abuse

BillW: "The root cause is deregulation of banks."

Guess who advocated for that until the past couple days? John McCain.

John McCain promises to stop greed and corruption on Wall Street. That's not a solution. That's wishful thinking. Greed is the name of the game on Wall Street. Wall Street investors are NEVER looking out for the working man, and nor should they be. That's not their job. Government oversight and regulation is meant to protect the working man from reckless decisions made by those on Wall Street. Greed is not the problem here. Greed drives Wall Street and the economy. People making stupid, reckless decisions on Wall Street is the problem. McCain really is an economic neophyte if he thinks greed is something he can put a stop to.

To whoever posts the story in the National Enquirer about Palin's family: Cut it out. Though the story is scarily plausible, it's coming from the National Enquirer, and therefore worth less than a bag of toenail clippings.

Posted by: Jonny | September 16, 2008 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Since it's always fun to listen to John McCain argue with John McCain, let's revisit McCain's two reactions to the Wall Street meltdown yesterday.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/stateupdates/gG5qKN


First there was this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSBs0tBVrHk
.


And then, a couple of hours later:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IduEBQH5WLw
.


Besides probably being the fastest flip-flop in political history, these two conflicting statements also provide some insight for undecided voters...they learned that that famous "straight talk" isn't all it's cracked up to be, and that John McCain is right...he really doesn't know too much about economics.

Posted by: AsperChick | September 16, 2008 3:31 PM | Report abuse

The silent majority will do what is right not (wright) and vote for Mcain/Palin they will not be duped into a Obama bin Biden smear and sneer campaign- call us all the names you would like... it only shows your desperation -King George is great.so glad he had two full terms long live the King-----GO Mcain!

Posted by: pablo | September 16, 2008 3:29 PM


............................................

I'm John McCain and I approve this message...

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse

The mystery of why Obama has not gained a greater advantage on the economy remains. I asked a veteran Democrat about this on Monday. "It baffles me," he said. The economic issue long has been the Democrats' bread and butter. "They have always been at their best whenever they've been given these issues," he said. His advice to Obama was to "go directly at it."

---------
IN A REAL CRISIS, people trust experience at the top of the ticket- NOT the 47 year old first term Senator's strong suit....Democratic President Clinton's administration- Robert Rubin - began deregulation, not McCain or Republicans- look it up!

Posted by: Scott | September 16, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse

I just can't understand why people would be offended by someone who went to Harvard. This is a recent development in American political life. I think people really want their leaders to be as stupid as they are.

Posted by: Derek | September 16, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse

The Economy IS fundamentally sound. Dems like to complain about the Repibs using 9/11 as a scare tactic when they use the economy, SSS, and welfare programs being recinded as their's.

Yesterday was NOT the Great Depression.

Biden needs to review his boss' talking points. He stated Obama would do away with Bush's tax cuts just a couple days after Obama said he wouldn't now because it would hurt the economy. I guess he didn't think Obama would flip/flop on his opinion that taxing the rich wouldn't hurt the economy.

I hope you Dems realize Obama is just trying to buy your votes. He changes as quickly as the polls.

Notice his statements today about how we got into this mess put the blame on McCain and Banks/Lenders and Speculators/Investors. HMM I guess the idiots who took loans they couldn't afford or bought into these ARMS or can't control their Credit Card debt don't deserve any blame.

Typical Mussolini-ish drivel.

Posted by: Sargeant Wag | September 16, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse

The silent majority will do what is right not (wright) and vote for Mcain/Palin they will not be duped into a Obama bin Biden smear and sneer campaign- call us all the names you would like... it only shows your desperation -King George is great.so glad he had two full terms long live the King-----GO Mcain!

Posted by: pablo | September 16, 2008 3:29 PM | Report abuse

"Political analysis by racists for racists..."

You don't have to be a racist to know that racism is still a fact of life -- a fact of life that should have been factored into the plans we make for our future.

If you think that this was a good time for the Democrats to have embarked on some kind of social experiment -- with so much at stake for all Americans -- then you will certainly be disappointed by the consequences of such risky behavior.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:29 PM | Report abuse

If he picked Hillary, there would be no lost momentum and it would have been a done deal. Or better yet, had the DNC not railroaded her, she would have led them to victory in november. i guess the only thing left to do now is to vote for the only ticket that seems to know wtf they are doing: mccain / palin. i hope the dems lose big time and maybe finally wake up.

Posted by: Hillraiser 123 | September 16, 2008 3:28 PM

............................................


Operation Chaos...ENGAGED!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:29 PM | Report abuse

Hi Obama how are you doing

Posted by: jentle | September 16, 2008 3:28 PM | Report abuse

What economy Bam banana Man bam?
GOOD HOME MADE
ALASKAN OIL and the GLORIOUS fratenal DEMOCRATIC bonding that's gonna happen with RUSSIA NOT ISLAM, THAT'S THE KINDA ECONOMY WERE TALKING ABOUT HERE,BAMMY.

DOWN BOY...... DOWN HUSSEIN BAMA

Posted by: obamaloosa | September 16, 2008 3:26 PM

............................................


Our new leader in the ignorance and hatred category...

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:28 PM | Report abuse

>So, what is your economic plan, Obama?

You can go to BarackObama.com and find out!

Posted by: Jan | September 16, 2008 3:28 PM | Report abuse

If he picked Hillary, there would be no lost momentum and it would have been a done deal. Or better yet, had the DNC not railroaded her, she would have led them to victory in november. i guess the only thing left to do now is to vote for the only ticket that seems to know wtf they are doing: mccain / palin. i hope the dems lose big time and maybe finally wake up.

Posted by: Hillraiser 123 | September 16, 2008 3:28 PM | Report abuse

What economy Bam banana Man bam?
GOOD HOME MADE
ALASKAN OIL and the GLORIOUS fratenal DEMOCRATIC bonding that's gonna happen with RUSSIA NOT ISLAM, THAT'S THE KINDA ECONOMY WERE TALKING ABOUT HERE,BAMMY.

DOWN BOY...... DOWN HUSSEIN BAMA

Posted by: obamaloosa | September 16, 2008 3:26 PM | Report abuse

Can someone please explain to me how drilling for more domestic oil and selling it on the world market is going to lead us to energy independence?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:26 PM | Report abuse

Obama has to forget Palin and talk exclusively about McCain, Gramm, the McCain lobbyists, McCain's votes for the past 20 years over and over and over. You don't have to say new stuff every day. Figure out which facts work and keep pounding on them. And smile and look like you are winning.

Posted by: libdemannie | September 16, 2008 3:25 PM | Report abuse

"Over the last few days, we have seen clearly what’s at stake in this election. The news from Wall Street has shaken the American people’s faith in our economy...."

Long-winded troll.

Posted by: bobbiewick | September 16, 2008 3:23 PM

...........................................

I forgot to attribute to bobbiewick earlier.

More analysis by racists for racists...

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:25 PM | Report abuse

So Obama could just call his buddies in organized crime and we could extort the funds to get the economy back on track... The liberal media has painted a portrait of this candidate which isn't what he really is. He has very questionable associates, launders money, rigs votes and admits to the use of illegal drugs (possibly as late as 99). It's time to wake up! Obama is not the answer!

Posted by: lost in corrupt america | September 16, 2008 3:24 PM | Report abuse

So, what is your economic plan, Obama?

Posted by: VS | September 16, 2008 3:24 PM | Report abuse

"Only send those of whatever race that dishonor the national anthem, refuse to wear a flag pin, have friends who are terrorists, and support anti-American racists like Wright. Are you one of them cowboy? Well... are you?

Posted by: Billw | September 16, 2008 3:15 PM
-----
I appreciate your sentiments to turn this country into a fascist state but we have this thing called a constitution and a bill of rights so maybe YOU are the one who is un-american

We'd have to send both McCain and Palin because McCain is real good buddies with convicted felon and unabashed proponent of domestic terrorism-G. Gordon Liddy (Ayers is a respected professor at a major university and has not been convicted of any crimes) and has his own pastor problem in Hagee, and Palin, well, apparently her husband wants to secede from the union and his hero founder of the AIP said he "had no use for God dammed America" etc. I won't even go into the outrageous statements Palin's pastor has made.

You sound like another racist republican ignorant knuckle-dragger.


Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:24 PM | Report abuse

No we're not. The reversal for Obama will be precipitous. Because there's an entire sector of the population who will never vote for Obama; a sector that won't allow itself to measured by polls. So the surprise won't be how many unexpected votes Obama gets; it will be how many voters who tell pollsters they will vote for Obama who in the privacy of the voting booth will pull the lever for McCain instead.


........................................

Political analysis by racists for racists...

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:24 PM | Report abuse

"Over the last few days, we have seen clearly what’s at stake in this election. The news from Wall Street has shaken the American people’s faith in our economy...."

Long-winded troll.

Posted by: bobbiewick | September 16, 2008 3:23 PM | Report abuse

Obama is a black guy and america does not need colored man to lead this country. It will be better served by dumb redneck white man. this is the downward opportunity for America to finally start its economic descent by electing mcain/palin. no innovation no jobs no business only drill, rich get richer, more God God and thats all. just see where China is going.

Posted by: anon | September 16, 2008 3:23 PM | Report abuse

If Palin doesnt believe in dinosaurs how does she explain McCain-Bush???

Posted by: philosopherkingtomas | September 16, 2008 3:23 PM | Report abuse

Posted by c nelson: "Obama would be the first President whose previous adult life"

Are you saying he is reincarnate?

Posted by: indy | September 16, 2008 3:22 PM | Report abuse

Save the Polar Bears, Impeach Sarah!

Posted by: julio | September 16, 2008 3:21 PM | Report abuse

"I think we are about to see a big turn around for Obama."

No we're not. The reversal for Obama will be precipitous. Because there's an entire sector of the population who will never vote for Obama; a sector that won't allow itself to measured by polls. So the surprise won't be how many unexpected votes Obama gets; it will be how many voters who tell pollsters they will vote for Obama who in the privacy of the voting booth will pull the lever for McCain instead.

Nobody really cares about Sarah Palin's family ups and downs. And I notice that the NE has backed off its assertion about Palin's supposed affair. David P. and Barry L. shot their mouths off too soon, apparently.

Posted by: bobbiewick | September 16, 2008 3:21 PM | Report abuse

The advisor is Sen. Gramm, who wrote the 1999 act that deregulated the financial industry. He is also the one who proclaimed we are a nation of whiners for complaining about the economy.

Posted by: bgjd1979 | September 16, 2008 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Remarks of Senator Barack Obama—as prepared for delivery
Confronting an Economic Crisis
Tuesday, September 16th, 2008
Golden, Colorado
Over the last few days, we have seen clearly what’s at stake in this election. The news from Wall Street has shaken the American people’s faith in our economy. The situation with Lehman Brothers and other financial institutions is the latest in a wave of crises that have generated tremendous uncertainty about the future of our financial markets. This is a major threat to our economy and its ability to create good-paying jobs and help working Americans pay their bills, save for their future, and make their mortgage payments.
Since this turmoil began over a year ago, the housing market has collapsed. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had to be effectively taken over by the government. Three of America’s five largest investment banks failed or have been sold off in distress. Yesterday, Wall Street suffered its worst losses since just after 9/11. We are in the most serious financial crisis in generations. Yet Senator McCain stood up yesterday and said that the fundamentals of the economy are strong
A few hours later, his campaign sent him back out to clean up his remarks, and he tried to explain himself again this morning by saying that what he meant was that American workers are strong. But we know that Senator McCain meant what he said the first time, because he has said it over and over again throughout this campaign – no fewer than 16 times, according to one independent count.
Now I certainly don’t fault Senator McCain for all of the problems we’re facing, but I do fault the economic philosophy he subscribes to. Because the truth is, what Senator McCain said yesterday fits with the same economic philosophy that he’s had for 26 years. It’s the philosophy that says we should give more and more to those with the most and hope that prosperity trickles down. It’s the philosophy that says even common-sense regulations are unnecessary and unwise. It’s a philosophy that lets Washington lobbyists shred consumer protections and distort our economy so it works for the special interests instead of working people.
We’ve had this philosophy for eight years. We know the results. You feel it in your own lives. Jobs have disappeared, and peoples’ life savings have been put at risk. Millions of families face foreclosure, and millions more have seen their home values plummet. The cost of everything from gas to groceries to health care has gone up, while the dream of a college education for our kids and a secure and dignified retirement for our seniors is slipping away. These are the struggles that Americans are facing. This is the pain that has now trickled up.
So let’s be clear: what we’ve seen the last few days is nothing less than the final verdict on an economic philosophy that has completely failed. And I am running for President of the United States because the dreams of the American people must not be endangered any more. It’s time to put an end to a broken system in Washington that is breaking the American economy. It’s time for change that makes a real difference in your lives.
If you want to understand the difference between how Senator McCain and I would govern as President, you can start by taking a look at how we’ve responded to this crisis. Because Senator McCain’s approach was the same as the Bush Administration’s: support ideological policies that made the crisis more likely; do nothing as the crisis hits; and then scramble as the whole thing collapses. My approach has been to try to prevent this turmoil.
In February of 2006, I introduced legislation to stop mortgage transactions that promoted fraud, risk or abuse. A year later, before the crisis hit, I warned Secretary Paulson and Chairman Bernanke about the risks of mounting foreclosures and urged them to bring together all the stakeholders to find solutions to the subprime mortgage meltdown. Senator McCain did nothing.
Last September, I stood up at NASDAQ and said it’s time to realize that we are in this together – that there is no dividing line between Wall Street and Main Street – and warned of a growing loss of trust in our capital markets. Months later, Senator McCain told a newspaper that he’d love to give them a solution to the mortgage crisis, “but” – he said – “I don’t know one.”
In January, I outlined a plan to help revive our faltering economy, which formed the basis for a bipartisan stimulus package that passed the Congress. Senator McCain used the crisis as an excuse to push a so-called stimulus plan that offered another huge and permanent corporate tax cut, including $4 billion for the big oil companies, but no immediate help for workers.
This March, in the wake of the Bear Stearns bailout, I called for a new, 21st century regulatory framework to restore accountability, transparency, and trust in our financial markets. Just a few weeks earlier, Senator McCain made it clear where he stands: “I’m always for less regulation,” he said, and referred to himself as “fundamentally a deregulator.”
This is what happens when you confuse the free market with a free license to let special interests take whatever they can get, however they can get it. This is what happens when you see seven years of incomes falling for the average worker while Wall Street is booming, and declare – as Senator McCain did earlier this year – that we’ve made great progress economically under George Bush. That is how you can reach the conclusion – as late as yesterday – that the fundamentals of the economy are strong.
Well, we have a different way of measuring the fundamentals of our economy. We know that the fundamentals that we use to measure economic strength are whether we are living up to that fundamental promise that has made this country great –that America is a place where you can make it if you try.
Americans have always pursued our dreams within a free market that has been the engine of our progress. It’s a market that has created a prosperity that is the envy of the world, and rewarded the innovators and risk-takers who have made America a beacon of science, and technology, and discovery. But the American economy has worked in large part because we have guided the market’s invisible hand with a higher principle – that America prospers when all Americans can prosper. That is why we have put in place rules of the road to make competition fair, and open, and honest.
Too often, over the last quarter century, we have lost this sense of shared prosperity. And this has not happened by accident. It’s because of decisions made in boardrooms, on trading floors and in Washington. We failed to guard against practices that all too often rewarded financial manipulation instead of productivity and sound business practices. We let the special interests put their thumbs on the economic scales. The result has been a distorted market that creates bubbles instead of steady, sustainable growth; a market that favors Wall Street over Main Street, but ends up hurting both.
Let me be clear: the American economy does not stand still, and neither should the rules that govern it. The evolution of industries often warrants regulatory reform - to foster competition, lower prices, or replace outdated oversight structures. Old institutions cannot adequately oversee new practices. Old rules may not fit the roads where our economy is leading. But instead of sensible reform that rewarded success and freed the creative forces of the market, too often we’ve excused an ethic of greed, corner-cutting and inside dealing that threatens the long-term stability of our economic system.
It happened in the 1980s, when we loosened restrictions on Savings and Loans and appointed regulators who ignored even these weaker rules. Too many S&Ls took advantage of the lax rules set by Washington to gamble that they could make big money in speculative real estate. Confident of their clout in Washington, they made hundreds of billions in bad loans, knowing that if they lost money, the government would bail them out. And they were right. The gambles did not pay off, our economy went into recession, and the taxpayers ended up footing the bill. Sound familiar?
And it has happened again during this decade, in part because of how we deregulated the financial services sector. After we repealed outmoded rules instead of updating them, we were left overseeing 21st century innovation with 20th century regulations. When subprime mortgage lending took a reckless and unsustainable turn, a patchwork of regulators systematically and deliberately eliminated the regulations protecting the American people and failed to raise warning flags that could have protected investors and the pensions American workers count on.
This was not the invisible hand of the market at work. These cycles of bubble and bust were symptoms of the ideology that my opponent is running to continue. John McCain has spent decades in Washington supporting financial institutions instead of their customers. In fact, one of the biggest proponents of deregulation in the financial sector is Phil Gramm – the same man who helped write John McCain’s economic plan; the same man who said that we’re going through a ‘mental recession’; and the same man who called the United States of America a “nation of whiners.” So it’s hard to understand how Senator McCain is going to get us out of this crisis by doing the same things with the same old players.
Make no mistake: my opponent is running for four more years of policies that will throw the economy further out of balance. His outrage at Wall Street would be more convincing if he wasn’t offering them more tax cuts. His call for fiscal responsibility would be believable if he wasn’t for more tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, and more of a trillion dollar war in Iraq paid for with deficit spending and borrowing from foreign creditors like China. His newfound support for regulation bears no resemblance to his scornful attitude towards oversight and enforcement. John McCain cannot be trusted to reestablish proper oversight of our financial markets for one simple reason: he has shown time and again that he does not believe in it.
What has happened these last eight years is not some historical anomaly, so we know what to expect if we try these policies for another four. When lobbyists run your campaign, the special interests end up gaming the system. When the White House is hostile to any kind of oversight, corporations cut corners and consumers pay the price. When regulators are chosen for their disdain for regulation and we gut their ability to enforce the law, then the interests of the American people are not protected. It’s an ideology that intentionally breeds incompetence in Washington and irresponsibility on Wall Street, and it’s time to turn the page.
Just today, Senator McCain offered up the oldest Washington stunt in the book – you pass the buck to a commission to study the problem. But here’s the thing – this isn’t 9/11. We know how we got into this mess. What we need now is leadership that gets us out. I’ll provide it, John McCain won’t, and that’s the choice for the American people in this election.
History shows us that there is no substitute for presidential leadership in a time of economic crisis. FDR and Harry Truman didn’t put their heads in the sand, or hand accountability over to a Commission. Bill Clinton didn’t put off hard choices. They led, and that’s what I will do. My priority as President will be the stability of the American economy and the prosperity of the American people. And I will make sure that our response focuses on middle class Americans – not the companies that created the problem.
To get out of this crisis – and to ensure that we are not doomed to repeat a cycle of bubble and bust again and again – we must take immediate measures to create jobs and continue to address the housing crisis; we must build a 21st century regulatory framework, and we must pursue a bold opportunity agenda that creates new jobs and grows the American economy.
To jumpstart job creation, I have proposed a $50 billion Emergency Economic Plan that would save 1 million jobs by rebuilding our infrastructure, repairing our schools, and helping our states and localities avoid damaging budget cuts.
I worked with leaders in Congress to create a new FHA Housing Security Program, which will help stabilize the housing market and allow Americans facing foreclosure to keep their homes at rates they can afford. Going forward, we need to replace Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as we know them with a structure that is focused on helping people buy homes – not engaging in market speculation. We can’t have a situation like the old S&L scandal where its “heads” investors win, and “tails” taxpayers lose. That’s going to take ending the lobbyist-driven dominance of these institutions that we’ve seen for far too long in Washington.
To prevent fraud in the mortgage market, I’ve proposed tough penalties on fraudulent lenders, and a Home Score system that will ensure consumers fully understand mortgage offers and whether they’ll be able to make payments. To help low- and middle-income families, I will ease the burden on struggling homeowners through a universal homeowner’s tax credit. This will add up to a 10 percent break off the mortgage interest rate for 10 million households. That’s another $500 each year for many middle class families.
Unlike Senator McCain, I will change our bankruptcy laws to make it easier for families to stay in their homes. Right now, if you’re a family that owns one house, bankruptcy judges are actually barred from helping you keep a roof over your head by writing down the value of your mortgage. If you own seven homes, the judge is free to write down any or all of the debt on your second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth or seventh homes. Now that may be of comfort to Senator McCain, but that’s the kind of out-of-touch Washington loophole that makes no sense. When I’m President, we’ll make our laws work for working people.
But as we’ve seen the last few days, the crisis in our financial markets now reaches well beyond the housing market. That’s why it’s time to do what I called for last September and again this past March – and it is only more overdue today.
Our capital markets cannot succeed without the public’s trust. It’s time to get serious about regulatory oversight, and that’s what I will do as President. That starts with the core principles for reform that I discussed at Cooper Union.
First, if you’re a financial institution that can borrow from the government, you should be subject to government oversight and supervision. When the Federal Reserve steps in as a lender of last resort, it is providing an insurance policy underwritten by the American taxpayer. In return, taxpayers have every right to expect that financial institutions with access to that credit are not taking excessive risks.
Second, we must reform requirements on all regulated financial institutions. We must strengthen capital requirements, particularly for complex financial instruments like some of the mortgage securities and other derivatives at the center of our current crisis. We must develop and rigorously manage liquidity risk. We must investigate rating agencies and potential conflicts of interest with the people they are rating. And we must establish transparency requirements that demand full disclosure by financial institutions to shareholders and counterparties. As we reform our regulatory system at home, we must address the same problems abroad so that financial institutions around the world are subject to similar rules of the road.
Third, we need to streamline our regulatory agencies. Our overlapping and competing regulatory agencies cannot oversee the large and complex institutions that dominate the financial landscape. Different institutions compete in multiple markets - Washington should not pretend otherwise. A streamlined system will provide better oversight and reduce costs.
Fourth, we need to regulate institutions for what they do, not what they are. Over the last few years, commercial banks and thrift institutions were subject to guidelines on subprime mortgages that did not apply to mortgage brokers and companies. This regulatory framework failed to protect homeowners, and made no sense for our financial system. When it comes to protecting the American people, it should make no difference what kind of institution they are dealing with.
Fifth, we must crack down on trading activity that crosses the line to market manipulation. The last six months have shown that this remains a serious problem in many markets and becomes especially problematic during moments of great financial turmoil. We cannot embrace the administration’s vision of turning over the protection of investors to the industries themselves. We need regulators that actually enforce the rules instead of overlooking them. The SEC should investigate and punish market manipulation, and report its conclusions to Congress.
Sixth, we must establish a process that identifies systemic risks to the financial system like the crisis that has overtaken our economy. Too often, we end up where we are today: dealing with threats to the financial system that weren’t anticipated by regulators. We need a standing financial market advisory group to meet regularly and provide advice to the President, Congress, and regulators on the state of our financial markets and the risks they face. It’s time to anticipate risks before they erupt into a full-blown crisis.
These six principles should guide the legal reforms needed to establish a 21st century regulatory system. But the change we need goes beyond laws and regulation. Financial institutions must do a better job at managing risks. There is something wrong when boards of directors or senior managers don’t understand the implications of the risks assumed by their own institutions. It’s time to realign incentives and CEO compensation packages, so that both high level executives and employees better serve the interests of shareholders.
Finally, the American people must be able to trust that their government is looking out for all of us - not the special interests that have set the agenda in Washington for eight years, and the lobbyists who run John McCain’s campaign.
I’ve spent my career taking on lobbyists and their money, and I’ve won. If you wanted a special favor in Illinois, there was actually a law that let you give campaign cash to politicians for their own personal use. In the State House, they called it business-as-usual. I called it legalized bribery, and while it didn’t make me the most popular guy in Springfield, I put an end to it.
When I got to Washington, we saw some of the worst corruption since Watergate. I led the fight for reform in my party, and let me tell you – not everyone in my party was too happy about it. When I proposed forcing lobbyists to disclose who they’re raising money from and who in Congress they’re funneling it to, I had a few choice words directed my way on the floor of the Senate. But we got it done, and we banned gifts from lobbyists, and free rides on their fancy jets. And I am the only candidate who can say that Washington lobbyists do not fund my campaign, they will not run my White House, and they will not drown out the voices of the American people when I am President of the United States. That’s how we’re going to end the outrage of special interests tipping the scales.
The most important thing we must do is restore opportunity for all Americans. To get our economy growing, we need to recapture that fundamental American promise. That if you work hard, you can pay the bills. That if you get sick, you won’t go bankrupt. That your kids can get a good education, and that we can leave a legacy of greater opportunity to future generations.
That’s the change the American people need. While Senator McCain likes to talk about change these days, his economic program offers nothing but more of the same. The American people need more than change as a slogan– we need change that makes a real difference in your life.
Change means a tax code that doesn’t reward the lobbyists who wrote it, but the American workers and small businesses who deserve it. I will stop giving tax breaks to corporations that ship jobs overseas, and I will start giving them to companies that create good jobs right here in America. I will eliminate capital gains taxes for small businesses and start-ups – that’s how we’ll grow our economy and create the high-wage, high-tech jobs of tomorrow.
I will cut taxes – cut taxes – for 95% of all working families. My opponent doesn’t want you to know this, but under my plan, tax rates will actually be less than they were under Ronald Reagan. If you make less than $250,000 a year, you will not see your taxes increase one single dime. In fact, I offer three times the tax relief for middle-class families as Senator McCain does – because in an economy like this, the last thing we should do is raise taxes on the middle-class.
I will finally keep the promise of affordable, accessible health care for every single American. If you have health care, my plan will lower your premiums. If you don’t, you’ll be able to get the same kind of coverage that members of Congress give themselves. And I will stop insurance companies from discriminating against those who are sick and need care the most
I will create the jobs of the future by transforming our energy economy. We’ll tap our natural gas reserves, invest in clean coal technology, and find ways to safely harness nuclear power. I’ll help our auto companies re-tool, so that the fuel-efficient cars of the future are built right here in America. I’ll make it easier for the American people to afford these new cars. And I’ll invest 150 billion dollars over the next decade in affordable, renewable sources of energy – wind power and solar power and the next generation of biofuels; an investment that will lead to new industries and five million new jobs that pay well and can’t ever be outsourced
And now is the time to finally meet our moral obligation to provide every child a world-class education, because it will take nothing less to compete in the global economy. I’ll recruit an army of new teachers, and pay them higher salaries and give them more support. But in exchange, I will ask for higher standards and more accountability. And we will keep our promise to every young American – if you commit to serving your community or your country, we will make sure you can afford a college education.
This is the change we need – the kind of bottom up growth and innovation that will advance the American economy by advancing the dreams of all Americans.
Times are hard. I will not pretend that the changes we need will come without cost – though I have presented ways we can achieve these changes in a fiscally responsible way. I know that we’ll have to overcome our doubts and divisions and the determined opposition of powerful special interests before we can truly reform a broken economy and advance opportunity.
But I am running for President because we simply cannot afford four more years of an economic philosophy that works for Wall Street instead of Main Street, and ends up devastating both.
I don’t want to wake up in four years to find that more Americans fell out of the middle-class, and more families lost their savings. I don’t want to see that our country failed to invest in our ability to compete, our children’s future was mortgaged on another mountain of debt, and our financial markets failed to find a firmer footing.
This time – this election – is our chance to stand up and say: enough is enough!
We can do this because Americans have done this before. Time and again, we’ve battled back from adversity by recognizing that common stake that we have in each other’s success. That’s why our economy hasn’t just been the world’s greatest wealth generator – it’s bound America together, it’s created jobs, and it’s made the dream of opportunity a reality for generation after generation of Americans.
Now it falls to us. And I need you to make it happen. If you want the next four years looking just like the last eight, then I am not your candidate. But if you want real change – if you want an economy that rewards work, and that works for Main Street and Wall Street; if you want tax relief for the middle class and millions of new jobs; if you want health care you can afford and education so that our kids can compete; then I ask you to knock on some doors, and make some calls, and talk to your neighbors, and give me your vote on November 4th. And if you do, I promise you – we will win Colorado, we will win this election, and we will change America together.

Posted by: obama | September 16, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse


From:
Head of State
http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/09/proposed-commercial-mac-vs-pc.html

Sunday, September 14, 2008
A Proposed Commercial: Mac vs. PC

(White background. Childlike piano music plays).

(A picture of Barack Obama appears against the background)

VO (Similar to voice of "Mac" character): Barack Obama is like a Mac.

(A picture of John McCain appears against the background)

VO (Similar to voice of "PC" character): John McCain is like a PC.

(Picture of a bank against the background)

VO: McCain likes the old economics, corporate welfare, and tax breaks for the wealthy of George W. Bush. He says "the economy is fundamentally strong."

(Quick cuts: Picture of Countrywide Branch, Picture of Bear Stearns, Picture of IndyMac, Picture of Lehman Brothers against background)

(Picture of Obama)

VO: Obama doesn't like old systems that crash.

(Picture of a mother, father, son and daughter against the background)

VO: Obama thinks that when it comes to health care, every American should have the access and support they need.

(Picture of family fades to blank background)

VO: McCain is against these health benefits for children, families and the elderly. He believes that when it comes to access and support for health, it's an "ownership society"--you're on your own.

(Picture of a woman standing against background)

VO: For women, McCain talks a good game, but he is against a woman's right to choose, would repeal Roe v. Wade, and even voted against equal pay for women.

(Picture expands to show many women standing behind her)

VO: Barack Obama believes that every woman should be paid the same for the same work as every man, and that every woman has the right to make her own choices.

(Picture of George W. Bush)

VO: Barack Obama has called for an end to the distortions, mismanagement, and failed policies of the Bush Administration that have left so many families in distress.

(Famed picture of McCain hugging George W. Bush)

VO: McCain has agreed with George W. Bush 90% of the time.

(Picture of McCain)

John McCain. Do you really want to spend another four years with the same old system?

(Music outro. Fade.)

Cite:
Head of State
http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/09/proposed-commercial-mac-vs-pc.html

Posted by: Robert Hewson | September 16, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

turn me on, i'm preggers - porkypalin@hotmail.com

Posted by: bristol palin | September 16, 2008 3:18 PM | Report abuse

Isn't that nice? The nation's banking system is collapsing, and members of CNN are not only discussing how it helps Obama, but are admitting that this is what his campaign wanted.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:13 PM

..........................................

Enough BS. I don't doubt that the Obama compaign may be pleased that this situation has changed the narrative from Sarah Palin to more substantive issues. However, there is a HUGE difference between a CNN analyst saying the Obama campaign should be happy for the change in topic and the Obama campaign saying they are happy that a crisis occurred.

This is typical right-wing smearing, with the writer trying to pin a perspective on their "enemy" despite the fact that there is no basis for doing so.

You folks who do this are pathetic liars and weasels.

Posted by: scott032 | September 16, 2008 3:18 PM | Report abuse

Retired USMC -

First, Demos only control Senate by one vote, and that vote is Lieberman, a McCain supporter. Second, it takes 60 votes in the senate to do anything important. third, The GOP has contolled one or both houses of Congress for 12 of the last 14 years.

Finally, the President appoints the administrators who are supposed to regulate the financial industry. Blaming this mess on the Demos is like blaming Hurricane Ike on the Coast Guard for not stopping it before it reached shore.

Posted by: bgjd1979 | September 16, 2008 3:17 PM | Report abuse

.

Ananymous:
"The FACT is that the person who wrote that law is John McCain's economic advisor."

Name the law and the person or STFU.


.

Posted by: Billw | September 16, 2008 3:17 PM | Report abuse

Can't wait for the debates.

http://www.FastArizona.com/McCain.html

Posted by: McCain | September 16, 2008 3:16 PM | Report abuse

"members of CNN are not only discussing how it helps Obama, but are admitting that this is what his campaign wanted."

Right, and CNN speaks for Obama, and it's all part of Obama's secret muslim plan to ruin America isn't it?

Ignoramus.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:16 PM | Report abuse

Dan Balz says "Obama now must make the change argument in a way that plays most to the strengths and attributes he might bring to the presidency". What strengths and attributes are those? Well let's see: Obama would be the first President whose previous adult life has been spent in the chosen company of urban terrorists, left wing extremists, hate-mongering racist ministers, and Chicago machine politicians. He would also be the first President without a dime's worth of prior experience in executive management, foreign policy, or military affairs. Maybe Obama's "change" isn't all it's cracked up to be.

Posted by: C Nelson | September 16, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

.

Anonymous:
"Yeah, let's send 'em all back!, while we're at it let's send all the whites back to Europe!"

Only send those of whatever race that dishonor the national anthem, refuse to wear a flag pin, have friends who are terrorists, and support anti-American racists like Wright. Are you one of them cowboy? Well... are you?


.

Posted by: Billw | September 16, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

Look at how much money Fannie and Freddie have given to Obama. This guy is a flim-flam man with loud-mouth Biden at his side. Shoulda' picked Hillary for veep, bonehead.

Posted by: Hillary | September 16, 2008 3:14 PM | Report abuse

"Obama has said McCain was a part of the problem. The fact is it was due to deregulation of the banks in the late 1900's.

Posted by: Billw | September 16, 2008 3:10 PM"

The FACT is that the person who wrote that law is John McCain's economic advisor.

But don't let facts get in the way like a good little republican.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:14 PM | Report abuse

It will be interesting to see if Senator McCain can tap-dance his way through this. On the one hand, he wants to show that he's going to effect "change" so he can make populist appeals. On the other, he does not want to alienate his financial backers, who are Reaganites that believe that government intervention in the market is inherently "bad".

Senator Obama on the other hand has a much freer hand to put forward proposals, since his supporters are likely to believe that much of the problem arises from the Republican Congress and President Bush deregulating the banking and financial sectors.

Senator McCain obviously has the greater challenge in addressing the situation, making this an major opportunity for the Obama campaign.

Posted by: scott032 | September 16, 2008 3:14 PM | Report abuse

any hot guys here wanna chat. IM me @ hotpantspalin@msn.com

Posted by: hotpantspalin | September 16, 2008 3:13 PM | Report abuse

CNN's Crowley: Obama Team Wanted 'Horrific' Wall Street Headlines

On Monday's "Anderson Cooper 360," after CNN senior political analyst David Gergen said "what happened over the weekend with the economy and the bottom falling out of the financial markets...is the opportunity for Obama to seize the momentum back on his side," Crowley actually said, "[J]ust as foreclosures were showing up on B-17, or in the real estate section, along comes this horrific headline out of Wall Street...I mean, this is what they wanted."

Isn't that nice? The nation's banking system is collapsing, and members of CNN are not only discussing how it helps Obama, but are admitting that this is what his campaign wanted.


Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:13 PM | Report abuse

The biggest deregulator in Congress was McCain's chief economic adviser Phil Gramm.He deregulated the mortgage industry that led tothis sub prime mess we are in.He pushed through the Futures and Commodities Modernization Act of 2000 which took away the oversight responsibilities of the CFTC that controled futures in oil manipulation.Remember $147 a barrel last May? The fundamentals indicated at that time $80 a barrel.This act also created the Enron loophole that allowed Ken Lay to bilk Californians out of $40 billion.McCain gave full support for all of these decisions.

Posted by: joseph marcucilli | September 16, 2008 3:12 PM | Report abuse

"All he's ever "run" is his mouth. He needs to go to Kenya and assist his relatives."

Yeah, let's send 'em all back!, while we're at it let's send all the whites back to Europe!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

It seems to me that Obama is in a different universe. Is it me or have others that remember it is the Democrats that have control of the House and Senate and while Bush may have his thoughts about things, it is the Democrats that have set the policies, remember that Bush is a LameDuck president.

Posted by: Retired USMC | September 16, 2008 3:10 PM | Report abuse

.


anonymous:
"You must not have heard his speech yesterday OR read this article.
Obama said "I do not blame John McCain for these problems" "

Obama has said McCain was a part of the problem. The fact is it was due to deregulation of the banks in the late 1900's.

.

Posted by: Billw | September 16, 2008 3:10 PM | Report abuse

I ask everyone to do what they can to keep McCain and Palin out of the White House. During the industrial revolution you didn’t innovate with the idea of buying more horses to battle the combustion engine. In the tech-Info revolution you did not win by buying more envelops, stamps and typewriters to compete with email the internet and computers. This ticket is running on the mantra drill-baby-drill? Yes we need oil and for the next 50 years but to start the diversification of energy is the single greatest opportunity we have before us today. It represents a full 360 of benefits.
Donate to the Campaign that represents this because the RNC have a money machine that will not stop.

Posted by: erik | September 16, 2008 3:09 PM | Report abuse

.

Anonymous:
"No one would let Obama run an ice cream stand"

All he's ever "run" is his mouth. He needs to go to Kenya and assist his relatives.

.

Posted by: Billw | September 16, 2008 3:06 PM | Report abuse

The problem was the software, since you're clearly too obtuse to have figured that out.

Posted by: bobbiewick | September 16, 2008 2:54 PM

...........................................

Of course it was...

Two words: user error.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:06 PM | Report abuse

Anything can happen over the next 7 weeks, but here is one thing you can bank on: There are probably a dozen economic reports coming out (to include two more unemployment reports, GDP, and inflation) and chances are very high they are all going to suck.

Shultz better have something bigger in his cannon than lipstick, Carly Fiorina, and anything Palin.

Posted by: Losercuda | September 16, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

"Obama's response to the financial problem is to complain and lay blame on McCain."

Posted by: Billw | September 16, 2008 3:01 PM

--------
You must not have heard his speech yesterday OR read this article.
Obama said "I do not blame John McCain for these problems"

but- Obama disagrees to the economic philosophy that McCain subscribes to that caused these problems - Phil (nation of whiners) Graham wrote the deregulation law, he is McCain's economic advisor.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

McCain is really really out of touch and scary. If the fundamentals of our economy are so strong, why are the middle class having so much trouble just putting food on the table, or buying our children a birthday present. McCain is like a slow bleed fixing to turn into a hemorrhage. If we vote him in, it will be nothing short of a disaster, for our country.

Here is a youtube video about McCain and wars, that is really well done, and worth watching.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdJUCU1UH2w&eurl=

Posted by: kdoklahoma | September 16, 2008 3:03 PM | Report abuse

.

Obama's response to the financial problem is to complain and lay blame on McCain. The root cause was deregulation of the banks, a gradual process in the late 1900's. McCain offers solutions, and a system to hold irresponsible people accountable in the future, while Obama's lame-brained comments are disgusting.

.

Posted by: Billw | September 16, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

>

Posted by: Anonymous

He ran the Harvard Law Review. What have you done, "Anonymous," that would make anyone think you knew what you were talking about? Like a good conservative, you are fearful and try to make us all so. Don't have a name? Yes, but scared to use it. You are worthless.

Posted by: edwcorey | September 16, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

I agree, rip those stumpy little arms off Mccains body and beat him to death with them.

========
Obama needs to keep turning up the heat. He has to pursue McCain aggressively on the economy and not let him off the hook. The election will turn on whether he can do this.

Posted by: bgjd1979 | September 16, 2008 2:55 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

I think we are about to see a big turn around for Obama. Mccain is riding the biggest crest of his campaign and he is only ahead by a point in the polls. Obama is just in cruising gear and they are even. Obama is about to do the ground game as Mccain hasn't even opened offices in most states. Obama has 3000 workers on the ground in Florida alone. It doesn't look like Mccain has any end game other then to buy cheap TV spots in the middle of the night of put out youtube spots and hope the media will give them some play by making them outrageous. Now Mccain has all his eggs in one basket in the name of Sarah Palin and that can blow up in his face any given day. She is already a plague to him riddled with scandal and a new one every few days.

such as


FROM THE FOLKS WHO BROUGHT JOHN EDWARD'S, THEY NOW BRINGS YOU: "TRACK PALIN"
THE COKE HEAD WHO BEAT GOING TO JAIL BY GOING IN THE MILITARY AND HIS WONDERFUL PARENTS WHO RAISED SUCH A FINE FAMILY.


The NATIONAL ENQUIRER’S exclusive ongoing investigation of GOP VP Nom Sarah 'Barracuda' Palin’s goes far beyond a mere teen pregnancy crisis this week!

The Enquirer’s team of reporters has combed the Alaskan wilderness to discover the hidden truth about Gov. Palin’s family, which has become a central part of her political identity.

The ENQUIRER has learned exclusively that Sarah's oldest son, Track, was addicted to the power drug OxyContin for nearly the past two years, snorting it, eating it, smoking it and even injecting it. And as Track, 19, heads to Iraq as part of the U.S. armed forces, Sarah and her husband Todd were powerless to stop his wild antics, detailed in the new issue of The ENQUIRER, which goes on sale today.

THE ENQUIRER also has exclusive details about Track's use of other drugs, including cocaine, and his involvement in a notorious local vandalism incident.

“I’ve partied with him (Track) for years,” a source disclosed. “I’ve seen him snort cocaine, snort and smoke OxyContin, drink booze and smoke weed.”

The source also divulged the girls would do anything for Track and he’d use his local celebrity status to manipulate other guys “to get them to steal things he wanted.”

“He finally did what a lot of troubled kids here do,” the source divulged. “You join the military.”

And as Gov. Palin has billed the state of Alaska for various expenses related to her children, as reported by The Washington Post, The ENQUIRER's investigation reveals that she was so incensed by 17-year-old Bristol's pregnancy that she banished her daughter from the house.

Another family friend revealed pre-prego Bristol was as much of a hard partier as Track was.

“Bristol was a huge stoner and drinker. I’ve seen her smoke pot and get drunk and make out with so many guys. All the guys would brag that the just made out with Bristol.”

When Sarah found out the teen was pregnant by high schooler Levi Johnston, she was actually banished from the house. As part of the cover-up, Palin quickly transferred Bristol to another high school and made her move in with Sarah’s sister Heather 25 miles away!

And the ENQUIRER also learned that Levi Johnston, the baby mamma’s future wedded dada, who was glad handed by John McCain at the GOP Convention, isn’t too happy about his impending shotgun nups either.

“Levi got dragged out of the house to go to Minnesota,” Levi’s friend told The ENQUIRER. “Levi realizes he’s stuck being with Bristol because her mom is running for Vice President.”

The friend also confided that both Bristol and Levi “broke up a few times and they definitely messed around with other people.”

Meanwhile, as members of the Palin family’s war viciously over “Trooper-Gate” and claims of Sarah’s extramarital affair have turned the political race into a chaotic arena of threats, denials and vicious attacks by political black ops, The ENQUIRER has discovered shocking new details about the red-hot affair scandal!

For the full story of the secrets Sarah Palin is trying to hide – pick up the new ENQUIRER!


Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 2:58 PM | Report abuse

Hi Dan,

Obama is definitely better at reforming the economy. I'm not sure why you or any one else in the media hasn't mentioned the fact that Obama gave a 6 point specific plan on reforming the financial markets.

http://thepage.time.com/obamas-remarks-on-confronting-an-economic-crisis/

Also, it's hypcrotical for McCain to suggest he's a reformer. This is the same guy who dubbed himself the "deregulator" and who employs as his financial advisers a group of very right-wing laissez fair individuals.

Phil Gramm, who wrote the deregulation bill in 1999 and who still believes the economy is great, and Carly Fiorina, who was the CEO of HP and go got what McCain attacks (a $21 million payout as outgoing ceo).

Posted by: David | September 16, 2008 2:57 PM | Report abuse

I think that the entire American populace should hold every single politician in this country on the hot-seat and demand to see them develop a plan to get us out of this mess.

Finger pointing will do us no good now, it's too late.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 2:56 PM | Report abuse

no one would let Obama run an ice cream stand... he sure the hell shouldn't be running the US

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 2:56 PM | Report abuse

Obama needs to keep turning up the heat. He has to pursue McCain aggressively on the economy and not let him off the hook. The election will turn on whether he can do this.

Posted by: bgjd1979 | September 16, 2008 2:55 PM | Report abuse

The McCain folks take Obama to task for being "messianic", yet McCain promises, in effect, that he will ensure that no investment bank ever again fails, and that no greed in the financial markets will go unpunished during his administration?

You might as well punish every first grader who demonstrates a preference for candy over kimchi, as punish every trader who gives evidence of greed.

McCain's simplistic moralism may play in the provinces, but if it brings about any change at all, it will be the sort of change brought about by that famous moralist Robespierre.

Posted by: Miss Hogynist | September 16, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

"Thank you bobbiewick for showing you are stupid enough to post the same drivel over and over..."

The problem was the software, since you're clearly too obtuse to have figured that out.

Posted by: bobbiewick | September 16, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

He could regain momentum by offering a some solutions instead of just blasting McCain. You may notice McCain is at least trying to look like he's taking some action while Barack complains.

I say hold 'em both on the hot seat.

Let's see some solutions from both of you.

If I were Obama I'd tout my energy plan as a way to reinvent the American worker and as a new beginning towards working our way out of this mess.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

Post in all caps make my eyes and ears hurt...take a valium...

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 2:48 PM | Report abuse

YES WE CAN,YES WE CAN!FIREDUP AND REALLY
TO GO!FIRED UP AND REALLY TO GO!
TARGETS ARE RUSH(KIDDIE PORN)LIMBAUGH
SECONDARY'S SEANITA(GAY)HANNITY AND THEIR
BLIND SHEEP,AND NUMBEROUS HATERS,OUR MISSION IS TO SAVE OUR COUNTRY,OUR OBJECTIVE TO COMPETE IN THE 21ST CENTURY.
WE ARE DEMOCRATICS AND OBAMA HAS WON OUR PARTY NOMINATION! AND NOW WE MARCH
TO THE FUTURE WE LOVE AND CHANGE AND HOPE, AND THE LIGHT AND THE BLESSING OF A POWER
HIGHER THAN OURSELVES! THANK YOU FATHER
FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY
TO REGAIN OUR WORLD BACK FROM THE JAWS OF
SATAN,SO CALL THE GREAT DECEIVER!

OBAMA/BIDEN
CC:THE COMPLETE DEMOCRATIC PARTY>

Posted by: HORNEY FOR HANNITY | September 16, 2008 2:47 PM | Report abuse

Thank you bobbiewick for showing you are stupid enough to post the same drivel over and over...

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 2:47 PM | Report abuse

Nothing makes Obama seem more out of touch than all of that highfalutin Harvard stuff he's been coming at us with. That's a big turnoff for the many, many voters who have not been seduced by brand-name colleges.

Posted by: bobbiewick | September 16, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

Nothing makes Obama seem more out of touch than all of that highfalutin Harvard stuff he's been coming at us with. That's a big turnoff for the many, many voters who have not been seduced by brand-name colleges.

Posted by: bobbiewick | September 16, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

Nothing makes Obama seem more out of touch than all of that highfalutin Harvard stuff he's been coming at us with. That's a big turnoff for the many, many voters who have not been seduced by brand-name colleges.

Posted by: bobbiewick | September 16, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

Nothing makes Obama seem more out of touch than all of that highfalutin Harvard stuff he's been coming at us with. That's a big turnoff for the many, many voters who have not been seduced by brand-name colleges.

Posted by: bobbiewick | September 16, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

Since it's always fun to listen to John McCain argue with John McCain, let's revisit McCain's two reactions to the Wall Street meltdown yesterday.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/stateupdates/gG5qKN


First there was this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSBs0tBVrHk
.


And then, a couple of hours later:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IduEBQH5WLw
.


Besides probably being the fastest flip-flop in political history, these two conflicting statements also provide some insight for undecided voters...they learned that that famous "straight talk" isn't all it's cracked up to be, and that John McCain is right...he really doesn't know too much about economics.

Posted by: AsperChick | September 16, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Since it's always fun to listen to John McCain argue with John McCain, let's revisit McCain's two reactions to the Wall Street meltdown yesterday.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/stateupdates/gG5qKN


First there was this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSBs0tBVrHk
.


And then, a couple of hours later:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IduEBQH5WLw
.


Besides probably being the fastest flip-flop in political history, these two conflicting statements also provide some insight for undecided voters...they learned that that famous "straight talk" isn't all it's cracked up to be, and that John McCain is right...he really doesn't know too much about economics.

Posted by: AsperChick | September 16, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company