Who is Barack Obama?
This election is determining who will run the most powerful country in the world for the next four years. It cannot be decided based on a popularity contest. McCain must get people to see Obama to be the slick slimely politician that got every other competitor kicked off the ballot to become State Senator in Illnois. That was Chicago politics," said John Kass, a veteran Chicago Tribune columnist. "Knock out your opposition, challenge their petitions, destroy your enemy, right? It is how Barack Obama destroyed his enemies back in 1996 that conflicts with his message today. He may have gotten his start registering thousands of voters. But in that first race, he made sure voters had just one choice."
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/29/obamas.first.campaign/index.html
Obama became a community organizer in Chicago to further his political career. There is absolutly nothing wrong with that. Unless he tries to pretend like he just wanted to help the poor and the thought of running for office wasn't even on his mind. Which of course he has been doing. Bobby Rush defeated Barack Obama in the 2000 Democratic Primary for a U.S. House seat. Representative Rush, a former Black Panther, said that Obama wasn't black enough during the campaign. “The accusations were that Obama was sent here and owned by the Jews,” Kindle said. “That he was here to steal the black vote and steal black land and that he was represented by the—as they were called—‘the white man.’ And that Obama wasn’t black enough and didn’t know the black experience, the black community." Also State Sen. Donne Trotter, said Obama was seen as "the white man in blackface.
"http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/07/21/080721fa_fact_lizza?
currentPage=allhttp://
www.usatoday.com/news/politics/2007-10-24-3157940059_x.htm
Statements such as these are why Obama alligned himself with people like Rev. Wright and Father Phleger. Obama could not afford to look like he was walking away from the black community, which is exactly what leaving Trinity United would've symbolized, so he stayed in Trinity United even when he heard (in my opinion he had to hear them) the remarks about the U.S. come from the pulpit. He stayed with the church for the same reason he became a community organizer, to further his political career. Some people might consider that smart politics. Others would say that there is something severely wrong with attending a church for political reasons. I'll let you make the call on that. Whatever the reason it doesn't seem like Obama is a "different kind of politican" to me.Rev. Wright and Father Phleger were not the only controversial people Obama associated with. He also associated with William Ayers a known terrorist you as said that his group Weather Underground did not do enough during their time in operation. Another person Obama has been liked to in Tony Rezko. Obama was part of a land deal with Rezko in which his wife bought a lot next to Obama's house. This allowed the Obamas to acquire their house at a reduced price. Rezko was under indictment at the time of this transaction. Tony Rezko is now a convicted Felon. There are several others however I only have so long to live so if you interested in the other connections go to this site.
http://www.barackobamaassociates.info/
According to the National Journal Obama was the country's most liberal senator in 2007. In 2005 he was 16th most liberal and in 2006 he was 10th most liberal. In other words the closer he got to the Democratic Primary the further left he went. Although I'm not sure I'd be voting for the 16th most liberal member either that means there were 84 Senators less liberal in 2005 than Barack Obama. That was before he was even running for President! In contrast Hillary Clinton was the 16th most liberal in 2007. She also got more liberal every year going into the primaries. So it's obvious that Obama is voting based on the political conditions of the moment. He does not make decisions based on convictions like John McCain has done. I think we all know the votes I'm talking about.
http://nj.nationaljournal.com/voteratings/
After all of this I still think the most distrubing thing about Obama is his inexperience and Judgement. I guess the people he has surrounded himself with speaks to his judgement, but his inexperience is also a major problem. Even though most people (according to the early polls) thought Obama won the debate Thursday night. I think McCain should say with the "he doesn't understand" line. Maybe even throw in some comments about him being a freshman or a rookie while he's at it. Eventually that will stick in the mind of the American people. I don't want the guy who delivers the paper to become the editor of the paper overnight, and I don't want Obama to go from freshman Senator to President of the United States overnight. This is the most powerful country in the world. We need someone at the wheel who knows how to handle the ship. Perhaps someone who has been a Captain in the Navy. Everyone is entitled to the American dream, but it's something you have to work for. Obama wants it handed to him having done nothing to earn it. If Obama becomes President it would be like handing the keys to a new Ferrari to a sixteen year old kid who just got his driver's license. I will just be waiting for the crash and my only question is how much of the country will be destroyed?
Borrowered from the "The New Conservatives"
September 30, 2008
September 29, 2008
Letter Discovered: Obama Camp Looks For "Break Your Heart" Teen Actresses to Play Incest-Rape Victims in Anti-Palin Ads
click to enlargeMore Hope and Change...
After the addition of Governor Sarah Palin to the Republican ticket earlier this month, the Obama Camp sent out ads looking for "break your heart" teen actresses to play incest-rape victims for their anti-Palin (and McCain) ads.
Needs of the Many posted the ad that was sent out to actresses in the Las Vegas area:
Here is the wording of the anti-Palin ad:
The actress should be 15-19, and “break your heart” without saying a word. Her role is that of a victim of incest or rape who is now pregnant, and “forced to keep her child b/c Roe v. Wade overturned means no exception for rape or incest.”
And, this is the candidate of hope and change?
By the way- McCain has made it clear that he supports abortion in cases of rape or incest. Governor Palin does not support abortion.
After the addition of Governor Sarah Palin to the Republican ticket earlier this month, the Obama Camp sent out ads looking for "break your heart" teen actresses to play incest-rape victims for their anti-Palin (and McCain) ads.
Needs of the Many posted the ad that was sent out to actresses in the Las Vegas area:
Here is the wording of the anti-Palin ad:
The actress should be 15-19, and “break your heart” without saying a word. Her role is that of a victim of incest or rape who is now pregnant, and “forced to keep her child b/c Roe v. Wade overturned means no exception for rape or incest.”
And, this is the candidate of hope and change?
By the way- McCain has made it clear that he supports abortion in cases of rape or incest. Governor Palin does not support abortion.
Is the fix in for this election?
The Blogfather has some very disturbing reports from a mainstream media source:
“Off the record, every suspicion you have about MSM being in the tank for O is true. We have a team of 4 people going thru dumpsters in Alaska and 4 in arizona. Not a single one looking into Acorn, Ayers or Freddiemae. Editor refuses to publish anything that would jeopardize election for O, and betting you dollars to donuts same is true at NYT, others. People cheer when CNN or NBC run another Palin-mocking but raising any reasonable inquiry into obama is derided or flat out ignored. The fix is in, and its working.”
Well, I guess we can add 4 to the already 30 “missing” investigators rummaging through Sarah Palin’s trash.
And with control of the media, all he needs to do is send out his storm troopers to intimidate critics. Oh wait, he’s already on top of that in Missouri.
And with the media fix, and storm troopers silencing critics, all he needs to do is control the voting machines. Oh wait, he’s already on top of that too in Ohio.
Liberal fascism is alive and well in 2008 thanks to the “post-partisan” Barack Obama.
“Off the record, every suspicion you have about MSM being in the tank for O is true. We have a team of 4 people going thru dumpsters in Alaska and 4 in arizona. Not a single one looking into Acorn, Ayers or Freddiemae. Editor refuses to publish anything that would jeopardize election for O, and betting you dollars to donuts same is true at NYT, others. People cheer when CNN or NBC run another Palin-mocking but raising any reasonable inquiry into obama is derided or flat out ignored. The fix is in, and its working.”
Well, I guess we can add 4 to the already 30 “missing” investigators rummaging through Sarah Palin’s trash.
And with control of the media, all he needs to do is send out his storm troopers to intimidate critics. Oh wait, he’s already on top of that in Missouri.
And with the media fix, and storm troopers silencing critics, all he needs to do is control the voting machines. Oh wait, he’s already on top of that too in Ohio.
Liberal fascism is alive and well in 2008 thanks to the “post-partisan” Barack Obama.
September 25, 2008
The Coal Industry Could Win This Election For John McCain!
In the wake of all that has happened today, what I am about to share with you may seem like a minor issue. However, there are so many far reaching implications to this information that it could seal the deal for a McCain Presidency.
According to Reuters New Service, Al Gore, in an interview today, urged young people to engage in civil disobedience to stop the construction of coal plants without the ability to store carbon. The only problem, there are no commercial scale projects that exist anywhere to demonstrate that type of technology.
According to the government, there are 28 coal plants under construction in the United States. Another 20 projects have permits and are nearly ready to begin building. This also does not include the plant which I blogged about yesterday in West Virginia. That plant will turn coal into liquid and ultimately into a gas substitute.
Why should Al Gore's statement have any relevance on the Presidential election? Well, if you add his "civil disobedience" statement to the statement made by Joe Biden yesterday saying he and Barack Obama do not support any coal plants here in American, there emerges a pattern.
On June 20, 2008 Harry Reid stated, ""The one thing we fail to talk about is those costs that you don't see on the bottom line. That is coal makes us sick, oil makes us sick; it's global warming. It's ruining our country, it’s ruining our world. We’ve got to stop using fossil fuel.” All while, Nancy Pelosi is "trying to save the planet."
Coal is a vital part of our energy future and redefining our independence from foreign oil. However, I do not wish to jump into the impact on our energy policy in this blog. What I do wish to look at is the coal industry and it's direct impact on this election.
Nearly one million jobs are directly and indirectly created by the coal industry. Most, but not all, of these jobs are found in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Kentucky. This industry is absolutely crucial to the economy of these states. In West Virginia, 99% of all electricity generated comes from coal and $214 billion is added to the state's economy.
For the Democrats, and specifically the Democrat Leadership, to take on the coal industry is to put this election in the hands of John McCain. Eastern Ohio, Western Pennsylvania will be the key to winning both of these states. If you directly challenge the blue-collar workers in these areas and their livelihoods, you will push this mostly democrat population into the hands of the Republicans.
Check mate.......the game will be over.
Posted by Stacy at 9:40 PM 5 comments
Labels: Al Gore, civil disobedience, coal industry, Harry Reid, Joe Biden, John McCain, Nancy Pelosi, no coal plants in America, Ohio, Pennsylvania
According to Reuters New Service, Al Gore, in an interview today, urged young people to engage in civil disobedience to stop the construction of coal plants without the ability to store carbon. The only problem, there are no commercial scale projects that exist anywhere to demonstrate that type of technology.
According to the government, there are 28 coal plants under construction in the United States. Another 20 projects have permits and are nearly ready to begin building. This also does not include the plant which I blogged about yesterday in West Virginia. That plant will turn coal into liquid and ultimately into a gas substitute.
Why should Al Gore's statement have any relevance on the Presidential election? Well, if you add his "civil disobedience" statement to the statement made by Joe Biden yesterday saying he and Barack Obama do not support any coal plants here in American, there emerges a pattern.
On June 20, 2008 Harry Reid stated, ""The one thing we fail to talk about is those costs that you don't see on the bottom line. That is coal makes us sick, oil makes us sick; it's global warming. It's ruining our country, it’s ruining our world. We’ve got to stop using fossil fuel.” All while, Nancy Pelosi is "trying to save the planet."
Coal is a vital part of our energy future and redefining our independence from foreign oil. However, I do not wish to jump into the impact on our energy policy in this blog. What I do wish to look at is the coal industry and it's direct impact on this election.
Nearly one million jobs are directly and indirectly created by the coal industry. Most, but not all, of these jobs are found in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Kentucky. This industry is absolutely crucial to the economy of these states. In West Virginia, 99% of all electricity generated comes from coal and $214 billion is added to the state's economy.
For the Democrats, and specifically the Democrat Leadership, to take on the coal industry is to put this election in the hands of John McCain. Eastern Ohio, Western Pennsylvania will be the key to winning both of these states. If you directly challenge the blue-collar workers in these areas and their livelihoods, you will push this mostly democrat population into the hands of the Republicans.
Check mate.......the game will be over.
Posted by Stacy at 9:40 PM 5 comments
Labels: Al Gore, civil disobedience, coal industry, Harry Reid, Joe Biden, John McCain, Nancy Pelosi, no coal plants in America, Ohio, Pennsylvania
September 24, 2008
September 22, 2008
Are the Democrates suffering from buyers remorse...?
to think maybe they should have gone with a leader with a strategy, not an orator with a teleprompter.
College credit-for-Obama students scheme killed
University of Massachusetts officials on Monday quashed efforts by an Amherst campus chaplain to offer two college credits to any student willing to campaign in New Hampshire this fall for Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.
Chaplain Kent Higgins told students in a Sept. 18 e-mail, “If you’re scared about the prospects for this election, you’re not alone. The most important way to make a difference in the outcome is to activate yourself. It would be just fine with (Republican candidate John) McCain if Obama supporters just think about helping, then sleep in and stay home between now and Election Day.”
Higgins added that an unnamed “sponsor” in the university’s history department would offer a two-credit independent study for students willing to canvass—identify supporters—or volunteer on behalf of the Democratic nominee.
University officials disavowed the effort after inquiries Monday by The Associated Press. They said it could run afoul of state ethics laws banning on-the-job political activity, as well as university policy.
“We do not engage in or sponsor partisan political activity,” said Audrey Alstadt, chairwoman of the history department. “We certainly do not give academic credit for participation in partisan politics.”
The benefits of a liberal education....
Chaplain Kent Higgins told students in a Sept. 18 e-mail, “If you’re scared about the prospects for this election, you’re not alone. The most important way to make a difference in the outcome is to activate yourself. It would be just fine with (Republican candidate John) McCain if Obama supporters just think about helping, then sleep in and stay home between now and Election Day.”
Higgins added that an unnamed “sponsor” in the university’s history department would offer a two-credit independent study for students willing to canvass—identify supporters—or volunteer on behalf of the Democratic nominee.
University officials disavowed the effort after inquiries Monday by The Associated Press. They said it could run afoul of state ethics laws banning on-the-job political activity, as well as university policy.
“We do not engage in or sponsor partisan political activity,” said Audrey Alstadt, chairwoman of the history department. “We certainly do not give academic credit for participation in partisan politics.”
The benefits of a liberal education....
September 21, 2008
Bush Called For Reform of Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac 17 Times in 2008 Alone... Dems Ignored Warnings
For many years the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of financial turmoil at a housing government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties. President Bush publicly called for GSE reform 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted.
Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded, as the President's repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems.
The White House released this list of attempts by President Bush to reform Freddie Mae and Freddie Mac since he took office in 2001.
Unfortunately, Congress did not act on the president's warnings:
** 2001
April: The Administration's FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is "a potential problem," because "financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity."
** 2002
May: The President calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in his 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)
** 2003
January: Freddie Mac announces it has to restate financial results for the previous three years.
February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that "although investors perceive an implicit Federal guarantee of [GSE] obligations," "the government has provided no explicit legal backing for them." As a consequence, unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market. ("Systemic Risk: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Role of OFHEO," OFHEO Report, 2/4/03)
September: Fannie Mae discloses SEC investigation and acknowledges OFHEO's review found earnings manipulations.
September: Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact "legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises" and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.
October: Fannie Mae discloses $1.2 billion accounting error.
November: Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any "legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk." To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have "broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards" and "receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)
** 2004
February: The President's FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital, and called for creation of a new, world-class regulator: "The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore…should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator." (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)
February: CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to "not take [the financial market's] strength for granted." Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by "ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, "Keeping Fannie And Freddie's House In Order," Financial Times, 2/24/04)
June: Deputy Secretary of Treasury Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and called for reform, saying "We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System." (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)
** 2005
April: Treasury Secretary John Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying "Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America… Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system." (Secretary John W. Snow, "Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee," 4/13/05)
** 2007
July: Two Bear Stearns hedge funds invested in mortgage securities collapse.
August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying "first things first when it comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options." (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, The White House, 8/9/07)
September: RealtyTrac announces foreclosure filings up 243,000 in August – up 115 percent from the year before.
September: Single-family existing home sales decreases 7.5 percent from the previous month – the lowest level in nine years. Median sale price of existing homes fell six percent from the year before.
December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying "These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I've called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon." (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, The White House, 12/6/07)
** 2008
January: Bank of America announces it will buy Countrywide.
January: Citigroup announces mortgage portfolio lost $18.1 billion in value.
February: Assistant Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, says "A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully." (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)
March: Bear Stearns announces it will sell itself to JPMorgan Chase.
March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and "move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages." (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)
April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation and "modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)
May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further.
"Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes. Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08)
"[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their homes. And one way we can do that – and Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)
"Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)
June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying "we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac." (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)
July: Congress heeds the President's call for action and passes reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.
In 2005-- Senator John McCain partnered with three other Senate Republicans to reform the government’s involvement in lending.
Democrats blocked this reform, too.
More... Not only did democrats not act on these warnings but Barack Obama put one of the major Sub-Prime Slime players on his campaign as finance chairperson.
UPDATE: The media is not reporting that the failed financial institutions are big Obama donors.
Hat Tip Larwyn
Labels: Campaign08
posted by Gateway Pundit at 9/21/2008 09:32:00 AM | 13 comments links to this post Trackback
Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded, as the President's repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems.
The White House released this list of attempts by President Bush to reform Freddie Mae and Freddie Mac since he took office in 2001.
Unfortunately, Congress did not act on the president's warnings:
** 2001
April: The Administration's FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is "a potential problem," because "financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity."
** 2002
May: The President calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in his 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)
** 2003
January: Freddie Mac announces it has to restate financial results for the previous three years.
February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that "although investors perceive an implicit Federal guarantee of [GSE] obligations," "the government has provided no explicit legal backing for them." As a consequence, unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market. ("Systemic Risk: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Role of OFHEO," OFHEO Report, 2/4/03)
September: Fannie Mae discloses SEC investigation and acknowledges OFHEO's review found earnings manipulations.
September: Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact "legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises" and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.
October: Fannie Mae discloses $1.2 billion accounting error.
November: Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any "legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk." To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have "broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards" and "receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)
** 2004
February: The President's FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital, and called for creation of a new, world-class regulator: "The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore…should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator." (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)
February: CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to "not take [the financial market's] strength for granted." Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by "ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, "Keeping Fannie And Freddie's House In Order," Financial Times, 2/24/04)
June: Deputy Secretary of Treasury Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and called for reform, saying "We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System." (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)
** 2005
April: Treasury Secretary John Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying "Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America… Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system." (Secretary John W. Snow, "Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee," 4/13/05)
** 2007
July: Two Bear Stearns hedge funds invested in mortgage securities collapse.
August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying "first things first when it comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options." (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, The White House, 8/9/07)
September: RealtyTrac announces foreclosure filings up 243,000 in August – up 115 percent from the year before.
September: Single-family existing home sales decreases 7.5 percent from the previous month – the lowest level in nine years. Median sale price of existing homes fell six percent from the year before.
December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying "These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I've called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon." (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, The White House, 12/6/07)
** 2008
January: Bank of America announces it will buy Countrywide.
January: Citigroup announces mortgage portfolio lost $18.1 billion in value.
February: Assistant Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, says "A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully." (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)
March: Bear Stearns announces it will sell itself to JPMorgan Chase.
March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and "move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages." (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)
April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation and "modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)
May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further.
"Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes. Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08)
"[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their homes. And one way we can do that – and Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)
"Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)
June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying "we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac." (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)
July: Congress heeds the President's call for action and passes reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.
In 2005-- Senator John McCain partnered with three other Senate Republicans to reform the government’s involvement in lending.
Democrats blocked this reform, too.
More... Not only did democrats not act on these warnings but Barack Obama put one of the major Sub-Prime Slime players on his campaign as finance chairperson.
UPDATE: The media is not reporting that the failed financial institutions are big Obama donors.
Hat Tip Larwyn
Labels: Campaign08
posted by Gateway Pundit at 9/21/2008 09:32:00 AM | 13 comments links to this post Trackback
September 19, 2008
Obama Wants Reform and Change, But Will He Clean His Own House?
Thanks to Smart Girl Politics
Senator McCain and Senator Obama are both calling for change and reform in Washington. It's not just what the people want in this country right now, but what we are demanding. After today's debacle in the financial district, it's alarming that there is still little action being taken to fix the problems instead of using a band aide as a solution.
Which of these candidates will actually bring the change that we desperately need? Will each candidate truly reach across the aisle and work with their opponents to make change happen? John McCain continuously says during his stump speeches that he will reach across the aisle to work with Democrats. During his acceptance speech for the Republican nomination, McCain stated that he would appoint Democrats and Independents in his administration. I tried to find where Senator Obama made the same statements, but was unable to do so.
With these things in mind, I want to test the fact that Senator Obama is not the reformer or change agent that he claims to be. You cannot change Washington without first challenging your own party. Democrats are currently the majority in both houses. In order to actually change Congress, he must immediately call for the resignation of the following members of Congress from their Chairman positions to clean his own house.
Kent Conrad-Chairman of Senate Budget Committee:
Senator Conrad recently admitted that he received a sweet-heart mortgage deal from Countrywide when buying an apartment building. He was part of the "Friends Of Angelo" scandal and eventually donated the money that he did not pay during his closing to charity. ($10,500) I guess he didn't understand the budget...mmmm.
Christopher Dodd-Chairman of the Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee:
Senator Dodd was also part of the "Friends of Angelo" sweet-heart mortgage deal scandal. He received over a $5,000 discount in his mortgage. The fun doesn't stop there with this one. He also received the most donations from Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and AIG of all politicians in Washington. Wow....did he profit from being head of the Banking Committee or what?
Barney Frank-Chairman of the Financial Services Committee:
If you read my blog from yesterday, you know that in 2006 he said that there were no issues with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and that no additional regulation was needed. This is the head of the Finance Committee for the House. Are you kidding me? If the head of the Committee didn't see it coming, how could he do anything about it?
Charlie Rengel-Chairman of the Ways and Means (taxation) Committee:
A few weeks ago, it was brought to Mr. Rengel's attention that for over a decade he paid no interest on a loan for a villa at a Resort in the Dominican Republic. He also failed to report rental income on the property on his Federal and State Tax Forms. HELLO....he is head of the Taxation Committee. He threw his wife under the bus saying that she is the one who takes care of their taxes. Unbelievable.
I won't mention Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. In 2006, Americans voted the Republicans out of office because of the war and corruption. The new Democratic Leadership brought promises of change and an unprecedented level of ethical behavior. This is the worst rated Congress with the worst accomplishment record in history. Don't worry though. I am sure that Senator Obama will bring change if he is elected. I am sure he will stand up to Pelosi, Reid, Howard Dean. Should I continue?
Well, take a look at those who are advising Senator Obama during his campaign. Two of Obama's top financial/economic advisers were the former heads of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Jim Johnson and Franklin Raines were the heads of the two organizations and made millions off of them. Franklin Raines was one of the heads of Lehman Brothers which just went defunct this week.
Will Senator Obama really bring change and reform to Washington? When will he begin to reach across the aisle? Which Republicans will Senator Obama appoint in his administration? Just a few things to consider when deciding your vote in the next several weeks.
Senator McCain and Senator Obama are both calling for change and reform in Washington. It's not just what the people want in this country right now, but what we are demanding. After today's debacle in the financial district, it's alarming that there is still little action being taken to fix the problems instead of using a band aide as a solution.
Which of these candidates will actually bring the change that we desperately need? Will each candidate truly reach across the aisle and work with their opponents to make change happen? John McCain continuously says during his stump speeches that he will reach across the aisle to work with Democrats. During his acceptance speech for the Republican nomination, McCain stated that he would appoint Democrats and Independents in his administration. I tried to find where Senator Obama made the same statements, but was unable to do so.
With these things in mind, I want to test the fact that Senator Obama is not the reformer or change agent that he claims to be. You cannot change Washington without first challenging your own party. Democrats are currently the majority in both houses. In order to actually change Congress, he must immediately call for the resignation of the following members of Congress from their Chairman positions to clean his own house.
Kent Conrad-Chairman of Senate Budget Committee:
Senator Conrad recently admitted that he received a sweet-heart mortgage deal from Countrywide when buying an apartment building. He was part of the "Friends Of Angelo" scandal and eventually donated the money that he did not pay during his closing to charity. ($10,500) I guess he didn't understand the budget...mmmm.
Christopher Dodd-Chairman of the Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee:
Senator Dodd was also part of the "Friends of Angelo" sweet-heart mortgage deal scandal. He received over a $5,000 discount in his mortgage. The fun doesn't stop there with this one. He also received the most donations from Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and AIG of all politicians in Washington. Wow....did he profit from being head of the Banking Committee or what?
Barney Frank-Chairman of the Financial Services Committee:
If you read my blog from yesterday, you know that in 2006 he said that there were no issues with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and that no additional regulation was needed. This is the head of the Finance Committee for the House. Are you kidding me? If the head of the Committee didn't see it coming, how could he do anything about it?
Charlie Rengel-Chairman of the Ways and Means (taxation) Committee:
A few weeks ago, it was brought to Mr. Rengel's attention that for over a decade he paid no interest on a loan for a villa at a Resort in the Dominican Republic. He also failed to report rental income on the property on his Federal and State Tax Forms. HELLO....he is head of the Taxation Committee. He threw his wife under the bus saying that she is the one who takes care of their taxes. Unbelievable.
I won't mention Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. In 2006, Americans voted the Republicans out of office because of the war and corruption. The new Democratic Leadership brought promises of change and an unprecedented level of ethical behavior. This is the worst rated Congress with the worst accomplishment record in history. Don't worry though. I am sure that Senator Obama will bring change if he is elected. I am sure he will stand up to Pelosi, Reid, Howard Dean. Should I continue?
Well, take a look at those who are advising Senator Obama during his campaign. Two of Obama's top financial/economic advisers were the former heads of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Jim Johnson and Franklin Raines were the heads of the two organizations and made millions off of them. Franklin Raines was one of the heads of Lehman Brothers which just went defunct this week.
Will Senator Obama really bring change and reform to Washington? When will he begin to reach across the aisle? Which Republicans will Senator Obama appoint in his administration? Just a few things to consider when deciding your vote in the next several weeks.
September 18, 2008
Democrats blocked Bush’s Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Reforms
Borrowed from Strategic_Thought
Thursday, September 18, 2008
After the bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and now AIG, everyone is wondering whose next and what really caused this mess. A look back in history provides some answers as to how we got here and what do we do now. The government leaned hard on banks back in the 70's thru the 90's to help those deemed less fortunate attain the American dream of homeownership. Problem is the folks who were being left out also tended to have bad credit histories. Under the banner of fairness, the banks capitulated and created what has become today's sub prime loan market. The rate of homeownership did in fact increase significantly in the last 10-15 years with much of that increase coming in disadvantaged groups.
When Bush toke office he attempt reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to raise credit and down payment requirements because of the huge and growing risks the government would face in an economic downturn.
From the NEW YORK TIMES September 11, 2003:
The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory
overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a
decade ago.
Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing
today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume
supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies
that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.
The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with
Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies.
It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would
determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning
portfolios.
The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration
that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more
than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken. A report by outside
investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to
mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge
against rising interest rates.
Democrats such as Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts and Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina blocked reform.
From the NEW YORK TIMES September 11, 2003:
''These two entities --
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,''
said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the
Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the
more pressure there is on these companies, and the less we will see in terms of
affordable housing.''
Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of
North Carolina, agreed.
''I don't see much other than a shell game
going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process
weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get
affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.
What actually caused the bank failures is the simple fact that home values are falling not rising. In a normal market where values are rising, banks don’t lose money on a failed loan because they get the house, which, with a rising value, is worth more than the loan.
The same thing happened in 1973, when energy costs doubled from the Arab oil embargo, banks failed, stocks fell, jobs where lost, home values fell.
Thursday, September 18, 2008
After the bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and now AIG, everyone is wondering whose next and what really caused this mess. A look back in history provides some answers as to how we got here and what do we do now. The government leaned hard on banks back in the 70's thru the 90's to help those deemed less fortunate attain the American dream of homeownership. Problem is the folks who were being left out also tended to have bad credit histories. Under the banner of fairness, the banks capitulated and created what has become today's sub prime loan market. The rate of homeownership did in fact increase significantly in the last 10-15 years with much of that increase coming in disadvantaged groups.
When Bush toke office he attempt reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to raise credit and down payment requirements because of the huge and growing risks the government would face in an economic downturn.
From the NEW YORK TIMES September 11, 2003:
The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory
overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a
decade ago.
Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing
today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume
supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies
that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.
The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with
Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies.
It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would
determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning
portfolios.
The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration
that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more
than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken. A report by outside
investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to
mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge
against rising interest rates.
Democrats such as Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts and Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina blocked reform.
From the NEW YORK TIMES September 11, 2003:
''These two entities --
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,''
said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the
Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the
more pressure there is on these companies, and the less we will see in terms of
affordable housing.''
Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of
North Carolina, agreed.
''I don't see much other than a shell game
going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process
weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get
affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.
What actually caused the bank failures is the simple fact that home values are falling not rising. In a normal market where values are rising, banks don’t lose money on a failed loan because they get the house, which, with a rising value, is worth more than the loan.
The same thing happened in 1973, when energy costs doubled from the Arab oil embargo, banks failed, stocks fell, jobs where lost, home values fell.
September 17, 2008
Blame the Democrats for this crisis and the one to come!
Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, was asked today if the Democrats bear any responsibility for the financial crisis. Her answer: no! I am not sure if that answer is pure stupidity or if she realizes how badly she is lying. Democrats not only share the blame, but they can take a larger portion of the blame than Republicans. Want proof?
The New York Times wrote five years ago on September 11, 2003:
The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.
Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.
The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.
The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt — is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.
The article goes on to detail how Republicans supported the reform legislation, but Democrats caving to Home Builders Associations killed the bill before it had a chance to pass.
"These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ”The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”
Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.
”I don’t see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,” Mr. Watt said.
Why would the Democrats block this bill ?Because they thought it would affect lower income people who wouldn't be able to afford housing. Hello....they couldn't afford it and now they are going through foreclosure. That is a much better option for the poor. You know what else the Democrats blocked five years ago......................A COMPREHENSIVE ENERGY PLAN.
And it looks like the one that they are currently offering up is in name only. Yes, they will open up the Outer-Continental Shelf for drilling, but only the areas that do not have any known oil reserves (50 miles off the coast). It puts a wind-fall profit tax on "big" oil companies. So basically they are going to give them new areas to drill without oil and at the same time tax them on their earnings. Do you really believe that will inspire them to drill more? Do they not understand this is our national security at risk?
Why is it the Democrats are ready to bail out Freddie/Fannie with tax payer money, but when companies make a profit they are evil? Isn't that ass backwards? You don't reward failing companies and punish companies that are succeeding!
Update: As of tonight, the House of Representatives passed their "NO REAL ENERGY/ENERGY PLAN"!
Update2: Thanks to one of my comments and some visitors from noquarter, I was able to find the quote from John McCain in 2006 that predicted this crisis was in the works. I thought Obama said that McCain doesn't get the economy:
The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator’s examination of the company’s accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement
with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.
For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac–known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs–and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO’s report this week does
nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO’s report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.
I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole
.It appears that not only did John McCain get it, but he got it before anyone else. It kind of reminds me of another issue that he was out in front of.....oh yeah.....the surge in Iraq. Where is the MSM on this? As usual, non-existent.
Posted by Stacy at 9:47 PM 3 comments
Labels: Energy Plan, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, House, Nancy Pelosi, New York Times, oil, Smart Girl Politics
The New York Times wrote five years ago on September 11, 2003:
The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.
Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.
The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.
The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt — is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.
The article goes on to detail how Republicans supported the reform legislation, but Democrats caving to Home Builders Associations killed the bill before it had a chance to pass.
"These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ”The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”
Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.
”I don’t see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,” Mr. Watt said.
Why would the Democrats block this bill ?Because they thought it would affect lower income people who wouldn't be able to afford housing. Hello....they couldn't afford it and now they are going through foreclosure. That is a much better option for the poor. You know what else the Democrats blocked five years ago......................A COMPREHENSIVE ENERGY PLAN.
And it looks like the one that they are currently offering up is in name only. Yes, they will open up the Outer-Continental Shelf for drilling, but only the areas that do not have any known oil reserves (50 miles off the coast). It puts a wind-fall profit tax on "big" oil companies. So basically they are going to give them new areas to drill without oil and at the same time tax them on their earnings. Do you really believe that will inspire them to drill more? Do they not understand this is our national security at risk?
Why is it the Democrats are ready to bail out Freddie/Fannie with tax payer money, but when companies make a profit they are evil? Isn't that ass backwards? You don't reward failing companies and punish companies that are succeeding!
Update: As of tonight, the House of Representatives passed their "NO REAL ENERGY/ENERGY PLAN"!
Update2: Thanks to one of my comments and some visitors from noquarter, I was able to find the quote from John McCain in 2006 that predicted this crisis was in the works. I thought Obama said that McCain doesn't get the economy:
The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator’s examination of the company’s accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement
with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.
For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac–known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs–and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO’s report this week does
nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO’s report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.
I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole
.It appears that not only did John McCain get it, but he got it before anyone else. It kind of reminds me of another issue that he was out in front of.....oh yeah.....the surge in Iraq. Where is the MSM on this? As usual, non-existent.
Posted by Stacy at 9:47 PM 3 comments
Labels: Energy Plan, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, House, Nancy Pelosi, New York Times, oil, Smart Girl Politics
September 16, 2008
Sen. Dodd, Please Surrender Your Gavel
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
September 16, 2008 By: Chris Healy Category: News
The Everyday Republican
At what point do the facts and the tasks of leaderships intersect to demonstrate that it is time for U.S. Sen. Chris Dodd to relinquish the gavel as Chairman of the Banking and Urban Affairs Committee?
We would argue it is now and we hope that the public calls on Sen. Dodd to resign as chairman of this important committee given the grave nature of our financial markets and Sen. Dodd’s failure throughout to see it and to act in our interests.
Let’s take a look at the sub-prime mortgage meltdown. Last year, there were plenty of indications that many banks and mortgage institutions were highly leveraged and did not have the capital needed to sustain large defaults. All you had to do was read the Wall Street Journal or watch Kudlow and Company.
On January 11, 2007, Chris Dodd decided to run for President. No sane person felt Dodd had any shot at all but he had a few millions dollars socked away, most of it coming from the financial institutions that Dodd is supposed to keep an eye on. So, off Dodd went to Iowa and as a result, his committee held few substantive meetings on the growing problem.
The first warning sign was February 2007, when the government reporterd than home sales were down 20 percent from 2006. Then in May, UBS, whose American headquarters sits in Stamford shuts down Dillon Read Capital Management, its US subprime arm and GM’s finance unit announces deep losses on subprime mortgages. Did anyone from Dodd’s office or the Senator himself think to call UBS and inquire as to the seriousness of the Dillon shutdown?
The Federal Reserve under Ben Bernanke, managed to keep many balls in the air, by pumping more money into the system, hoping it would stem the tide of bad loans, over-leverage hedge funds and other financial instruments created to market garbage home loans as securities. Meanwhile, Dodd put his children in Iowa schools, knuckled down to the hard work of candidate debates and was endorsed by a firefighter’s union.
In August, the first gut punches came - American Home Mortgage, one of the largest US independent home-loan providers, files for Chapter 11; Countrywide, the biggest US mortgage lender, narrowly avoids bankruptcy by taking out emergency $11.5 billion loan and then, on August 31, Ameriquest goes out of business.
On January 3rd, Iowa Democrats went to the polls and a few dozen managed to vote for Chris Dodd, who had to fly Connecticut Democrats out to the state to fill a room. Later that month, the government reported that homes facing foreclosure up 57% compared to same month of previous year. US unemployment rises sharply.
It is important to pause here and reflect on one reason why Sen. Dodd thought no attention was needed to the mortgage meltdown and huge losses in the equity markets - information. Dodd, like most lawmakers, gets his information from thousands of lobbyists who dominate the halls of Congress. The financial industries have some of the best and best financed.
According to www.OpenSecrets.org, Sen. Dodd was the largest recipient of contributions from employees of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two quasi public organizations which insure two-thirds of the mortgages in the country. Dodd collected $165,400 over the last nine years. Dodd has collected thousands more from other banks, insurance companies, bond agencies, the whole spectrum of interests that comprise this nation’s financial industries.
How can anyone claim to see clearlywhen so much money and attention is clouding their vision adn judgment? Chris Dodd swims in a sea of special interest money on a daily basis and those who have his ear, pay for the privilege to float by and give him their take on things.
Some influence in other ways, like Countrywide Financial, which was always looking for friends in Congress. The company President, Angelo Mozillo, has a program for the well-connected to provide lower than market rate loans for mortgages. Chris Dodd got two of these mortgages and it saved him a bundle. Sen. Dodd claimed he got no special treatment and would disclose the details of his arrangement with Countrywide.
Sen. Dodd promised to disclose them in late July. We are still waiting. That was the same week he told the public that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were solvent.
When the U.S. Treasury seized Fannie and Freddie, Dodd said hearings should be held to examine the details. Now, he says, we should wait until the dust settles.
Do you see a pattern here Mr. and Mrs. Connecticut? Our senior Senator has no clue or has had a clue for a long time. While the value of your home falls, Chris Dodd takes a vacation or worse, does nothing.
Many books will be written about how Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac scammed the system, built an empire and paid good salaries to the politically connected and walked away with even a bigger pay day. One chapter should be devoted to Sen. Dodd and why he was asleep at the switch, or was persuaded that nothing was amiss.
Either way. Sen. Dodd has failed to lead. His committee of jurisdiction was a paper tiger. He should hand the gavel to someone who at least reads the Wall Street Journal or Barron’s and understands what is happening in the real world and that it isn’t pretty.
September 15, 2008
Did Obma attempt to sabotage US efforts in Iraq?
The most disturbing news of the day is an article in the New York Post that talks about Obama's efforts to stall a US troop withdrawal agreement with Iraq.
The article states that during Obama's recent trip to Iraq, when he met with the most senior Iraqi leadership, he tried to sabotage US efforts to negotiate a troop withdrawal agreement. It quotes senior Iraqi officials as saying that Obama actually tried to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington.
It quotes Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari as saying "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.”
The article then goes on to report another serious charge that while meeting with top US commanders including General David Petraeus, he tried to get them to actually change their military viewpoints on a realistic withdrawal date for US troops.
Obama's motivation for such an attempt would appear clear. He spent the last year and a half of his campaign talking about what an incredible mistake the surge was. And he is of course facing an opponent in John McCain that fought for the surge when it was extremely unpopular. It would seem that it would be convenient for Obama for our efforts to appear not to be going nearly as well as they are. But for a presidential candidate to actually interfere in United States war efforts for campaign gain or advantage is a very, very shocking accusation.
This also brings up the question of campaign promises. His campaign has been saying that he is for a withdrawal by 2010. However if this was delayed because of his efforts to stop a troop withdrawal agreement from being negotiated until after his election, followed by the Iraqi election shortly thereafter, followed by the time needed to put together a Iraqi coalition government after the election, the withdrawal by 2010 is simply not possible.
According to the article, the overall impression that Obama left on the leadership of Iraq is that he doesn't want Iraq to appear anything like a success because that takes away his main attack against the Bush administration. When asked about his foreign-policy experience, he always says its not about experience, it's a matter of judgment. And he goes on to say that the true test of his judgment was his decision that Iraq was the wrong war and would never be a success and his decision to fight tooth and nail against the surge.
These are very, very serious charges that need to be either proved or disproved as quickly as possible. I personally hope that this story goes the way of “Sarah Palin’s daughter is actually her granddaughter” story. This accusation is to incendiary to leave hanging out there. It needs to be proved or disproved by the mainstream media. I hope they devote a good amount of resources to doing this so we either know this is true or not, as soon as possible.
In the words of Abraham Lincoln in 1863, "Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should be arrested, exiled, or hanged".
I strongly urge you to read this article and draw your own conclusions.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/09152008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/obama_tried_to_stall_gis_iraq_withdrawal_129150.htm
Rebublished from Strategic_Thought
The article states that during Obama's recent trip to Iraq, when he met with the most senior Iraqi leadership, he tried to sabotage US efforts to negotiate a troop withdrawal agreement. It quotes senior Iraqi officials as saying that Obama actually tried to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington.
It quotes Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari as saying "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.”
The article then goes on to report another serious charge that while meeting with top US commanders including General David Petraeus, he tried to get them to actually change their military viewpoints on a realistic withdrawal date for US troops.
Obama's motivation for such an attempt would appear clear. He spent the last year and a half of his campaign talking about what an incredible mistake the surge was. And he is of course facing an opponent in John McCain that fought for the surge when it was extremely unpopular. It would seem that it would be convenient for Obama for our efforts to appear not to be going nearly as well as they are. But for a presidential candidate to actually interfere in United States war efforts for campaign gain or advantage is a very, very shocking accusation.
This also brings up the question of campaign promises. His campaign has been saying that he is for a withdrawal by 2010. However if this was delayed because of his efforts to stop a troop withdrawal agreement from being negotiated until after his election, followed by the Iraqi election shortly thereafter, followed by the time needed to put together a Iraqi coalition government after the election, the withdrawal by 2010 is simply not possible.
According to the article, the overall impression that Obama left on the leadership of Iraq is that he doesn't want Iraq to appear anything like a success because that takes away his main attack against the Bush administration. When asked about his foreign-policy experience, he always says its not about experience, it's a matter of judgment. And he goes on to say that the true test of his judgment was his decision that Iraq was the wrong war and would never be a success and his decision to fight tooth and nail against the surge.
These are very, very serious charges that need to be either proved or disproved as quickly as possible. I personally hope that this story goes the way of “Sarah Palin’s daughter is actually her granddaughter” story. This accusation is to incendiary to leave hanging out there. It needs to be proved or disproved by the mainstream media. I hope they devote a good amount of resources to doing this so we either know this is true or not, as soon as possible.
In the words of Abraham Lincoln in 1863, "Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should be arrested, exiled, or hanged".
I strongly urge you to read this article and draw your own conclusions.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/09152008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/obama_tried_to_stall_gis_iraq_withdrawal_129150.htm
Rebublished from Strategic_Thought
September 12, 2008
Er, which candidate is the dangerous one?
For those out there who do not believe there is bias in the main stream media, you must read this. Charles Gibsons feeble attempt to hatched Sara Palin has backfired, again.
Permalink Andrew Bolt Blog
Andrew Bolt
Friday, September 12, 2008 at 08:12pm
Sarah Palin has given her first interview since being picked as the Republican’s vice-presidential candidate. The media has scrabbled for evidence of fumbles, and evidence that a shootin’, cussin’ redneck is about to plunge the world into war.
And away they go. From the Toronto Globe and Mail:
Shooting from the hip on foreign policy, Palin raises spectre of war with Russia
Indeed, 3AW’s Neil Mitchell this morning scoffed that a President Palin would have already started “four wars”, to judge by the interview.
Really? Let’s check.
The first war a President Palin would allegedly start was with Pakistan, by invading it in the hunt for terrorists, and perhaps from the transcript you might agree the words are indeed naive and alarming:
We should start with the premise that the United States, like all sovereign nations, has the unilateral right to defend itself against attack. As such, our campaign to take out Al Qaeda base camps and the Taliban regime that harbored them was entirely justified… (I)f we’ve got (Osama bin Laden) in our sites, we should ask for Pakistan’s cooperation, we should ask Pakistan to take him out. But if they don’t, we shouldn’t need permission to go after folks that killed 3,000 Americans.
Oops, sorry. That was actually Barack Obama. This is Palin:
ABC News Anchor Gibson also asked Palin several times whether or not U.S. forces have the right to make cross-border attacks into Pakistan with or without the approval of the Pakistani government…
“In order to stop Islamic extremists, those terrorists, who would seek to destroy America and our allies, we must do whatever it takes, and we must not blink...”
The other war a President Palin would start, according to Mitchell, was with Russia over Georgia (should Georgia be a NATO member, which it isn’t). Again, the transcript might sound alarming:
I would also argue that we have the right to take unilateral military action to eliminate an imminent threat to our security— so long as an imminent threat is understood to be a nation, group, or individual that is actively preparing to strike U.S. targets (or allies with which the United States has mutual defense agreements)...
And those allies should include Georgia:
I have consistently called for deepening relations between Georgia and transatlantic institutions, including a Membership Action Plan for NATO...
Oops. Again, that’s Obama. Here is Palin:
Asked whether the United States would have to go to war with Russia if it invaded Georgia, and the country was part of NATO, Palin said: “Perhaps so.”
“I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you’re going to be expected to be called upon and help,” she said.
Pressed on the question, Palin responded: “What I think is that smaller democratic countries that are invaded by a larger power is something for us to be vigilant against ... We have got to show the support, in this case, for Georgia. The support that we can show is economic sanctions perhaps against Russia, if this is what it leads to.”
War three, fretted Mitchell, would be one with Iran, now seeking nuclear weapons, according to most assessments. Go to the scary transcript:
(T)he global community should offer “big sticks and big carrots” to persuade Iran to halt its nuclear programme.
“A nuclear Iran would pose a grave threat and the world must prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon...”
Damn, that’s Obama again. Here is Palin:
PALIN: No, no. I agree with John McCain that nuclear weapons in the hands of those who would seek to destroy our allies, in this case, we’re talking about Israel, we’re talking about Ahmadinejad’s comment about Israel being the “stinking corpse, should be wiped off the face of the earth,” that’s atrocious. That’s unacceptable.
GIBSON: So what do you do about a nuclear Iran?
PALIN: We have got to make sure that these weapons of mass destruction, that nuclear weapons are not given to those hands of Ahmadinejad, not that he would use them, but that he would allow terrorists to be able to use them. So we have got to put the pressure on Iran and we have got to count on our allies to help us, diplomatic pressure.
And the fourth war? Over Israel. To the transcript:
I will always keep the threat of military action on the table to defend our security and our ally, Israel.
You guessed it. Obama again. Here is Palin:
GIBSON: What if Israel decided it felt threatened and needed to take out the Iranian nuclear facilities?
PALIN: Well, first, we are friends with Israel and I don’t think that we should second guess the measures that Israel has to take to defend themselves and for their security.
If Mitchell is alarmed by Palin, running for vice president, he should be terrified by Obama, running for president. Either that, or he should accept that nothing Palin said was particularly bellicose, extreme or unreasonable. He’s just fallen for the Palin=redneck spin of the Left.
In fact, when you read the transcript of Palin’s discussion with reporter Charlie Gibson on foreign affairs, you realise how the gotcha cherry-picking of quotes from it, and the spin given to it, completely misrepresents Palin’s general ease with the subject. The Left dreamed of her making a fool of herself - “er, who’s Putin?” - but she most certainly did not.
Permalink Andrew Bolt Blog
Andrew Bolt
Friday, September 12, 2008 at 08:12pm
Sarah Palin has given her first interview since being picked as the Republican’s vice-presidential candidate. The media has scrabbled for evidence of fumbles, and evidence that a shootin’, cussin’ redneck is about to plunge the world into war.
And away they go. From the Toronto Globe and Mail:
Shooting from the hip on foreign policy, Palin raises spectre of war with Russia
Indeed, 3AW’s Neil Mitchell this morning scoffed that a President Palin would have already started “four wars”, to judge by the interview.
Really? Let’s check.
The first war a President Palin would allegedly start was with Pakistan, by invading it in the hunt for terrorists, and perhaps from the transcript you might agree the words are indeed naive and alarming:
We should start with the premise that the United States, like all sovereign nations, has the unilateral right to defend itself against attack. As such, our campaign to take out Al Qaeda base camps and the Taliban regime that harbored them was entirely justified… (I)f we’ve got (Osama bin Laden) in our sites, we should ask for Pakistan’s cooperation, we should ask Pakistan to take him out. But if they don’t, we shouldn’t need permission to go after folks that killed 3,000 Americans.
Oops, sorry. That was actually Barack Obama. This is Palin:
ABC News Anchor Gibson also asked Palin several times whether or not U.S. forces have the right to make cross-border attacks into Pakistan with or without the approval of the Pakistani government…
“In order to stop Islamic extremists, those terrorists, who would seek to destroy America and our allies, we must do whatever it takes, and we must not blink...”
The other war a President Palin would start, according to Mitchell, was with Russia over Georgia (should Georgia be a NATO member, which it isn’t). Again, the transcript might sound alarming:
I would also argue that we have the right to take unilateral military action to eliminate an imminent threat to our security— so long as an imminent threat is understood to be a nation, group, or individual that is actively preparing to strike U.S. targets (or allies with which the United States has mutual defense agreements)...
And those allies should include Georgia:
I have consistently called for deepening relations between Georgia and transatlantic institutions, including a Membership Action Plan for NATO...
Oops. Again, that’s Obama. Here is Palin:
Asked whether the United States would have to go to war with Russia if it invaded Georgia, and the country was part of NATO, Palin said: “Perhaps so.”
“I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you’re going to be expected to be called upon and help,” she said.
Pressed on the question, Palin responded: “What I think is that smaller democratic countries that are invaded by a larger power is something for us to be vigilant against ... We have got to show the support, in this case, for Georgia. The support that we can show is economic sanctions perhaps against Russia, if this is what it leads to.”
War three, fretted Mitchell, would be one with Iran, now seeking nuclear weapons, according to most assessments. Go to the scary transcript:
(T)he global community should offer “big sticks and big carrots” to persuade Iran to halt its nuclear programme.
“A nuclear Iran would pose a grave threat and the world must prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon...”
Damn, that’s Obama again. Here is Palin:
PALIN: No, no. I agree with John McCain that nuclear weapons in the hands of those who would seek to destroy our allies, in this case, we’re talking about Israel, we’re talking about Ahmadinejad’s comment about Israel being the “stinking corpse, should be wiped off the face of the earth,” that’s atrocious. That’s unacceptable.
GIBSON: So what do you do about a nuclear Iran?
PALIN: We have got to make sure that these weapons of mass destruction, that nuclear weapons are not given to those hands of Ahmadinejad, not that he would use them, but that he would allow terrorists to be able to use them. So we have got to put the pressure on Iran and we have got to count on our allies to help us, diplomatic pressure.
And the fourth war? Over Israel. To the transcript:
I will always keep the threat of military action on the table to defend our security and our ally, Israel.
You guessed it. Obama again. Here is Palin:
GIBSON: What if Israel decided it felt threatened and needed to take out the Iranian nuclear facilities?
PALIN: Well, first, we are friends with Israel and I don’t think that we should second guess the measures that Israel has to take to defend themselves and for their security.
If Mitchell is alarmed by Palin, running for vice president, he should be terrified by Obama, running for president. Either that, or he should accept that nothing Palin said was particularly bellicose, extreme or unreasonable. He’s just fallen for the Palin=redneck spin of the Left.
In fact, when you read the transcript of Palin’s discussion with reporter Charlie Gibson on foreign affairs, you realise how the gotcha cherry-picking of quotes from it, and the spin given to it, completely misrepresents Palin’s general ease with the subject. The Left dreamed of her making a fool of herself - “er, who’s Putin?” - but she most certainly did not.
September 11, 2008
Bush 7, Terrorists 0....
For a more compelling read on the anniversary of 9/11, follow the link below to Ann Coulter's piece today. A must read for anyone who doubted our ability to keep us safe.
September 8, 2008
September 7, 2008
September 6, 2008
September 5, 2008
A Great Piece by Michael Reagan
Welcome Back Dad
By Michael Reagan
September 4, 2008
I've been trying to convince my fellow conservatives that they have been wasting their time in a fruitless quest for a new Ronald Reagan to emerge and lead our party and our nation. I insisted that we'd never see his like again because he was one of a kind.
I was wrong!
Wednesday night I watched the Republican National Convention on television and there, before my very eyes, I saw my Dad reborn; only this time he's a she.
And what a she!
In one blockbuster of a speech, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin resurrected my Dad's indomitable spirit and sent it soaring above the convention center, shooting shock waves through the cynical media's assigned spaces and electrifying the huge audience with the kind of inspiring rhetoric we haven't heard since my Dad left the scene.
This was Ronald Reagan at his best -- the same Ronald Reagan who made the address known now solely as "The Speech," which during the Goldwater campaign set the tone and the agenda for the rebirth of the traditional conservative movement that later sent him to the White House for eight years and revived the moribund GOP.
Last night was an extraordinary event. Widely seen beforehand as a make-or-break effort -- either an opportunity for Sarah Palin to show that she was the happy warrior that John McCain assured us she was, or a disaster that would dash McCain's presidential hopes and send her back to Alaska, sadder but wiser.
Obviously un-intimidated by either the savage onslaught to which the left-leaning media had subjected her, or the incredible challenge she faced -- and oozing with confidence -- she strode defiantly to the podium and proved she was everything and even more than John McCain told us.
Much has been made of the fact that she is a woman. What we saw last night, however, was something much more than a just a woman accomplishing something no Republican woman has ever achieved. What we saw was a red-blooded American with that rare, God-given ability to rally her dispirited fellow Republicans and take up the daunting task of leading them -- and all her fellow Americans -- on a pilgrimage to that shining city on the hill my father envisioned as our nation's real destination.
In a few words she managed to rip the mask from the faces of her Democratic rivals and reveal them for what they are -- a pair of old-fashioned liberals making promises that cannot be kept without bankrupting the nation and reducing most Americans to the status of mendicants begging for their daily bread at the feet of an all-powerful government.
Most important, by comparing her own stunning record of achievement with his, she showed Barack Obama for the sham that he is, a man without any solid accomplishments beyond conspicuous self-aggrandizement.
Like Ronald Reagan, Sarah Palin is one of us. She knows how most of us live because that's the way she lives. She shares our homespun values and our beliefs, and she glories in her status as a small-town woman who put her shoulder to the wheel and made life better for her neighbors.
Her astonishing rise up from the grass-roots, her total lack of self-importance, and her ordinary American values and modest lifestyle reveal her to be the kind of hard-working, optimistic, ordinary American who made this country the greatest, most powerful nation on the face of the earth.
As hard as you might try, you won't find that kind of plain-spoken, down-to-earth, self-reliant American in the upper ranks of the liberal-infested, elitist Democratic Party, or in the Obama campaign.
Sarah Palin didn't go to Harvard, or fiddle around in urban neighborhood leftist activism while engaging in opportunism within the ranks of one of the nation's most corrupt political machines, never challenging it and going along to get along, like Barack Obama.
Instead she took on the corrupt establishment in Alaska and beat it, rising to the governorship while bringing reforms to every level of government she served in on her way up the ladder.
Welcome back, Dad, even if you're wearing a dress and bearing children this time around.
Posted by Cigar Mike at 06:17 PM | Permanent Link to this Post | Habla (1)
By Michael Reagan
September 4, 2008
I've been trying to convince my fellow conservatives that they have been wasting their time in a fruitless quest for a new Ronald Reagan to emerge and lead our party and our nation. I insisted that we'd never see his like again because he was one of a kind.
I was wrong!
Wednesday night I watched the Republican National Convention on television and there, before my very eyes, I saw my Dad reborn; only this time he's a she.
And what a she!
In one blockbuster of a speech, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin resurrected my Dad's indomitable spirit and sent it soaring above the convention center, shooting shock waves through the cynical media's assigned spaces and electrifying the huge audience with the kind of inspiring rhetoric we haven't heard since my Dad left the scene.
This was Ronald Reagan at his best -- the same Ronald Reagan who made the address known now solely as "The Speech," which during the Goldwater campaign set the tone and the agenda for the rebirth of the traditional conservative movement that later sent him to the White House for eight years and revived the moribund GOP.
Last night was an extraordinary event. Widely seen beforehand as a make-or-break effort -- either an opportunity for Sarah Palin to show that she was the happy warrior that John McCain assured us she was, or a disaster that would dash McCain's presidential hopes and send her back to Alaska, sadder but wiser.
Obviously un-intimidated by either the savage onslaught to which the left-leaning media had subjected her, or the incredible challenge she faced -- and oozing with confidence -- she strode defiantly to the podium and proved she was everything and even more than John McCain told us.
Much has been made of the fact that she is a woman. What we saw last night, however, was something much more than a just a woman accomplishing something no Republican woman has ever achieved. What we saw was a red-blooded American with that rare, God-given ability to rally her dispirited fellow Republicans and take up the daunting task of leading them -- and all her fellow Americans -- on a pilgrimage to that shining city on the hill my father envisioned as our nation's real destination.
In a few words she managed to rip the mask from the faces of her Democratic rivals and reveal them for what they are -- a pair of old-fashioned liberals making promises that cannot be kept without bankrupting the nation and reducing most Americans to the status of mendicants begging for their daily bread at the feet of an all-powerful government.
Most important, by comparing her own stunning record of achievement with his, she showed Barack Obama for the sham that he is, a man without any solid accomplishments beyond conspicuous self-aggrandizement.
Like Ronald Reagan, Sarah Palin is one of us. She knows how most of us live because that's the way she lives. She shares our homespun values and our beliefs, and she glories in her status as a small-town woman who put her shoulder to the wheel and made life better for her neighbors.
Her astonishing rise up from the grass-roots, her total lack of self-importance, and her ordinary American values and modest lifestyle reveal her to be the kind of hard-working, optimistic, ordinary American who made this country the greatest, most powerful nation on the face of the earth.
As hard as you might try, you won't find that kind of plain-spoken, down-to-earth, self-reliant American in the upper ranks of the liberal-infested, elitist Democratic Party, or in the Obama campaign.
Sarah Palin didn't go to Harvard, or fiddle around in urban neighborhood leftist activism while engaging in opportunism within the ranks of one of the nation's most corrupt political machines, never challenging it and going along to get along, like Barack Obama.
Instead she took on the corrupt establishment in Alaska and beat it, rising to the governorship while bringing reforms to every level of government she served in on her way up the ladder.
Welcome back, Dad, even if you're wearing a dress and bearing children this time around.
Posted by Cigar Mike at 06:17 PM | Permanent Link to this Post | Habla (1)
September 4, 2008
Sarah Palin "Winged" Her Speech Because of "Broken" Teleprompter.....
Halfway through Sarah Palin's speech tonight at the RNC, people following the speech noticed she was deviating from the prepared text.
According to sources close to the McCain campaign, the teleprompter continued scrolling during applause breaks. As a result, half way through the speech, the speech had scrolled significantly from where Governor Palin was in the speech. The malfunction also occurred during Rudy Giuliani's speech, explaining his significant deviations from his speech.
Unfazed, Governor Palin continued, from memory, to deliver her speech without the teleprompter cued to the appropriate point in her speech.
Contrast this to Barack Obama who, when last his teleprompter malfunctioned, was left stuttering before a crowd unable to advance his speech until the problem was resolved.
Sarah Palin. Winner.
Posted by: Erick Erickson
Thursday, September 4, 2008 at 01:00AM
61 Comments
Newsflash:
Sources close to the Obama campaign are revealing that the Democratic nominee is furious over being upstaged by Sarah Palin’s performance during her speech tonight in Minneapolis. The source of Obama’s ire is not Gov. Palin, however. He is incensed with his own campaign advisors. Palin’s performance tonight was exactly what Obama wanted for his campaign. An experienced running mate with strong feminine traits; who has the ability to be tough, without sounding catty; one who would be able to stand and deliver the tough message, while wearing heels. After his first choice refused the offer to join the ticket, the Obama camaign convinced the Democratic nominee to choose Sen. Joe Biden as his running mate. Attempts to reach Rep. Barney Frank on his rejection of Sen. Obama’s initial VP nod have not been successful to date. We will keep trying to reach Rep. Frank in order to give you the complete story as it becomes available.
travlinman said:
travlinman said:
September 3, 2008
America's Most Nervous Teenager
Any 18-year-old in the position of Levi Johnston must dread more than anything his encounter with his girlfriend's father--here, the very formidable Todd Palin. But Johnston's worries didn't end there. He arrived in Minneapolis today with the Palin family and received this greeting:
Actually, the kid seems to have a lot of guts. No doubt what's happening is a lot more than he bargained for, but it looks like tonight he will be introduced, or at least waved at, as part of the Palin family. Some "scandal."
Borrowed from Powerline.
Actually, the kid seems to have a lot of guts. No doubt what's happening is a lot more than he bargained for, but it looks like tonight he will be introduced, or at least waved at, as part of the Palin family. Some "scandal."
Borrowed from Powerline.
September 2, 2008
Kristol on Sarah Palin, Hockey Mom
McCain aides whose judgment I trust are impressed by Sarah Palin. One was particularly amused by this exchange: A nervous young McCain staffer took it upon himself to explain to Palin the facts of life in a national campaign, the intense scrutiny she'd be under from the media, the viciousness of the assault that she'd be facing, etc.:
Palin: "Thanks for the warning. By the way, do you know what they say the difference is between a hockey mom and a Pit Bull?"
McCain aide: "No, Governor."
Palin: "A hockey mom wears lipstick."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)