In case anyone thought racism in America was dead . . . (1 Viewer)

[statsman]

The United States is constantly harping about the fact that it is a capitolist country and that "bailouts" are a sign of creeping socialism.
In a capitolist economy, a poorly run company which makes stupid mistakes is supposed to fail.
I have no problem with the government LENDING these idiots the money providing the current executive corps is shown the door as a condition.

 

[dkinley]

I see that McCain has taken Obama's viewpoint on the crisis and that ceo's should be taken to task and prevented from gaining as the result of any bailout, McCain of course has to bail out of a debate on ideas of how future leaders would protect American taxpayers 'cause he doesn't have any ideas of his own

Yeah, talk about not watching the news ... McCain asked for like 1 debate a week until the election and Obama said no. Now that McCain wants to demonstrate bipartisanship and work both sides, Obama says thats not the way to go and they should have the debate and be able to 'work a couple of things at once.' So much for Obama giving proof that he is capable of working both sides and putting some reform into government with passage of said bill, given the opportunity he is not going to do it but instead studying for a debate.

Sounds like that kid on the playground when they know they can't fight all of a sudden gets a burst of courage and 'man, I really wanted to fight that guy.'

I guess 100 days in office was too much for Obama - he'd rather campaign than do the job he was elected for. More checks in the self-serving column in book.

-dK

 

[Alisa]

The United States is constantly harping about the fact that it is a capitolist country and that "bailouts" are a sign of creeping socialism.
In a capitolist economy, a poorly run company which makes stupid mistakes is supposed to fail.
I have no problem with the government LENDING these idiots the money providing the current executive corps is shown the door as a condition.

America has ALWAYS had socialism for the rich and free enterprise for the poor. This bailout is a naked money grab. Isn't the cause of this problem the fact that people can't pay their mortgages? Then logically, couldn't the problem be solved by enabling people to pay their mortgages by say, giving them a fixed interest rate of 4%? Wouldn't that cost about 1% of this proposed "bailout"? But god forbid we do anything to help poor people, much better to drown the rich in even MORE money

 

[Alisa]

Yeah, talk about not watching the news ... McCain asked for like 1 debate a week until the election and Obama said no. Now that McCain wants to demonstrate bipartisanship and work both sides, Obama says thats not the way to go and they should have the debate and be able to 'work a couple of things at once.' So much for Obama giving proof that he is capable of working both sides and putting some reform into government with passage of said bill, given the opportunity he is not going to do it but instead studying for a debate.

Sounds like that kid on the playground when they know they can't fight all of a sudden gets a burst of courage and 'man, I really wanted to fight that guy.'

I guess 100 days in office was too much for Obama - he'd rather campaign than do the job he was elected for. More checks in the self-serving column in book.

-dK

Yes, it is true that Obama did not accept McCain's invitation to do "town hall" debates. Why, I don't know, but so what? The upcoming presidential debates are a formal part of the election process. The dates were set more than a year ago. The fact that Obama chose not to do extra debates on McCain's turf is completely irrevelvant to McCain's current attempt to dodge what will certainly be very hard questions about his role in the current catastrophe should the debate go forward. If McCain doesn't show up tomorrow, he will look like a total loser. That is like entering the olympics and not showing up to the race.

 

[georgedwilkinson]

McCain's current attempt to dodge what will certainly be very hard questions about his role in the current catastrophe

I'm glad you brought this up.

Seems McCain wanted to do something about this back in 2005 when Clinton's failed policies regarding giving mortgages to people who couldn't afford them was brought forward by Fed Chairman Greenspan. Along party lines, the Democrats blocked any action on dealing with the issue then. McCain was showing leadership back then (when it might have done some good).

Now that McCain has once again stepped forward as a leader, suspending his own campaign so he could do the job his state already hired him to do, Obama has shown his lack of ability to lead by saying the leaders can let him know if they need him, as usual refusing to do the job his state hired him to do. Huh? He should be up front fighting for the American people, being a real leader, but he's letting other people dictate whether he's even required to help resolve the crisis. This is not leadership.

An interesting question is who has received more money from Freddie/Fannie execs? McCain or Obama?

So in the present and in the past: McCain = clear leader; Obama = clear follower/loser. Man I hope NObama doesn't make it into the President's seat, he'll do less than Jimmy Carter did.

 

[georgedwilkinson]

Yes, it is true that Obama did not accept McCain's invitation to do "town hall" debates. Why, I don't know, but so what?

It leaves us regular folks with the impression that he doesn't want to debate because he can't talk.

It also makes us believe that McCain believes he has some advantage by having more debates.

 

[Alisa]

Speaking of interesting things, Rick Davis is still working for his lobbying firm, which receives thousands of dollars a month from Freddie, even as he manages McCain's campaign.

Another interesting thing, McCain has been on the side of deregulation for the last 26 years, even when that deregulation removes protections for us. Funny that now, all of the sudden, he has seen the light and realizes that regulation is part of the job of government.

 

[Alisa]

It leaves us regular folks with the impression that he doesn't want to debate because he can't talk.

It also makes us believe that McCain believes he has some advantage by having more debates.

Changing the subject doesn't change the fact that McCain is planning to play hookey for a formal part of the campaign that has been on the schedule for over a year that he had already agreed to participate in.

Whether or not Obama did or did not want to participate in any other informal scheme of the McCain campaign is still completely irrelevant.

 

[Alisa]

In case you are about to ask about the Rick Davis thing: http://www.newsweek.com/id/160713

 

[georgedwilkinson]

Another interesting thing, McCain has been on the side of deregulation for the last 26 years, even when that deregulation removes protections for us. Funny that now, all of the sudden, he has seen the light and realizes that regulation is part of the job of government.

I believe he's being forced into it by the failed policies of Bill Clinton. Clinton asked Freddie/Fannie to suspend it's belief on the ability of poor people to pay their mortgages. Greenspan saw that the policy was failing in 2005 and the Democrats in Congress blocked any attempt to resolve the crisis then.

This was caused by asking a company (regulating) to do something they normally would not have done. Since regulation caused the mess, regulation will be required to fix it. Even someone who doesn't believe in regulation has to see that.

And I know that tons of people in politics have taken money from Freddie/Fannie: I was asking about McCain & Obama's involvement in the corruption.

 

[Alisa]

Actually it was lack of regulation that caused the mess, and Bill Clinton IS partly to blame - he did NOT support legislation that would have prevented everyone and their mother from giving out mortgages.

The problem is, McCain has always been against regulation, even good regulation. I believe that at heart he is still against it now, even though that position is so unpopular as to be untenable at the moment.

 

[georgedwilkinson]

Changing the subject doesn't change the fact that McCain is planning to play hookey for a formal part of the campaign that has been on the schedule for over a year that he had already agreed to participate in.

Whether or not Obama did or did not want to participate in any other informal scheme of the McCain campaign is still completely irrelevant.

"The" schedule? Who's schedule is that? I was unaware that either of the candidates knew they would be on the ticket a year ago. Not sure how either of them could have put it in their calendar programs back then. The fact is, if something isn't done about the current crisis, none of us will be able to afford to drive to the polls or the electricity to watch a debate on TV. This should supercede all politics (like Obama, your candidate, said).

I think it is wise of Obama to not participate in McCain's scheme to involve him in more debates (one of the few times he's shown any wisdom). It was clearly a losing proposition for Obama to face McCain and could only help McCain.

 

[Alisa]

The debate commission scheduled the debates over a year ago. Both Obama and McCain announced their candidacy over a year ago. Connect the dots . . .

There are plenty of ways to fix the current economic problems that do NOT involve giving billions of tax payer dollars to private enterprises (otherwise known as SOCIALISM).

 

[georgedwilkinson]

Actually it was lack of regulation that caused the mess, and Bill Clinton IS partly to blame - he did NOT support legislation that would have prevented everyone and their mother from giving out mortgages.

See, there's number 3. But Congress, including Joe Biden, was complicit, too.

The problem is, McCain has always been against regulation, even good regulation. I believe that at heart he is still against it now, even though that position is so unpopular as to be untenable at the moment.

I'm guessing McCain is still against regulation, with good cause. Had Clinton not regulated in the bad policy, this might not have happened. Many other people in the Republican camp would say they are against regulation, too. It's one of the defining traits.

 

[dkinley]

Speaking of interesting things, Rick Davis is still working for his lobbying firm, which receives thousands of dollars a month from Freddie, even as he manages McCain's campaign.

Again the pot calling the kettle black ... if you are NOT affiliated with the Democrat parties then you should be objective. Objectivity means to please refrain from trying to smear one side without looking at both parties.

See link to look at the lobbyists working for Obama:
http://online.wsj.com/public/articl...FnulL5UqrgCcKfZRIY_20090301.html?mod=rss_free

I won't even go into the the fact that Franklin Raines is an advisor to Obama. This was the same guy that ran Fannie Mae into the ground.

Also, just for the record ...

Indeed, during the late 1990s, the Clinton administration and Fannie Mae bragged about how they had lowered the standards required to borrow money for homes to increase borrowing by groups that otherwise wouldn’t qualify.

So .... who really is to blame? Bush evidently carried forward a policy set by the Democrats. Way to go and get the black eye for their failed policy for both parties, but look who everyone is blaming.

-dK

 

[georgedwilkinson]

There are plenty of ways to fix the current economic problems that do NOT involve giving billions of tax payer dollars to private enterprises (otherwise known as SOCIALISM).

That's 4.

The give aways is what got us into this mess in the first place, thanks to Clinton and the Congress of 2005.

 

[Rich]

Had Clinton not regulated in the bad policy, this might not have happened. Many other people in the Republican camp would say they are against regulation, too. It's one of the defining traits.

Who's been in office for the past eight years, the fact is if Bush hadn't have started wars all over the place, well see if you can figure it out

 

[Alisa]

Hey George, did you read George Will's column this week?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/22/AR2008092202583.html

 

[georgedwilkinson]

Hey George, did you read George Will's column this week?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/22/AR2008092202583.html

Interesting. The right has always had a problem with McCain. The conservative talking heads have been attacking him for years. I personally had to reach very deep before I was willing to pledge my support to him.

Though I'm not sure why McCain not liking the guy who was unable or unwilling to correct the financial crisis is a problem. I'd guess you could find billions of people in the US on both sides who don't like that guy right now.

 

[Rich]

Why the hell did McCain mention 9/11 in his lie that he was championing going to the whitehouse as a saint to help solve the mess that occured during his party's leadership, what an insult to those that lost their lives during 9/11 by even comparing it to the greed of banks