Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 21, 2008 at 4:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)

So Neo, were do you stand on the Fairness Doctrine? Here's my question:

Should government regulate equal time to both political parties in the media.

Posted by Slick77 (anonymous) on September 21, 2008 at 9:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Neo...(Mr. Premise) I'll make 1 comment for now because I have a full day ahead.
"Do you agree with this premise?"

"Premise"...
• Something taken to be true without proof: assumption, postulate, postulation, presupposition, supposition, theory, thesis.
• To take for granted without proof: assume, posit, postulate, presume, presuppose, suppose.

Yep! accept the premise, not only Christian values, moral values.
Neo...waiting to hear the answer from the question by Noesis.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 21, 2008 at 11:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)

How about freedom of intimidation from democrats?

News has emerged that the organizers of that anti-Iran rally that famously got snarled up in Senator Hillary Clinton's ire at Governor Sarah Palin last week were threatened by New York Democrats with IRS action against their tax-exempt status if they allowed Palin to speak. CBS local NY news reported this little fact and so did NBC but most of the national news has ignored this outrageous threat to use the IRS to silence Governor Palin.

Accusing New York Democrats of using "McCarthyism" to shut Palin down, Democrat Assemblyman Dov Hikind was flabbergasted by the behind the scenes threats against the rally organizers. "It's an absolute shame that this has happened," CBS quoted Hikind as saying. "To threaten organizations … to threaten the Conference of Presidents that if you don't withdraw the invitation to Gov. Palin we're going to look into your tax exempt status … that's McCarthyism."
http://wcbstv.com/local/clinton.palin.ev...

I guess they were taking that from the Clinton playbook... Have the IRS investigate people who disagreed with you.

Posted by SkyWatcher (anonymous) on September 21, 2008 at 12:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Here's an interesting article I came across :
On June 10, 1932, McFadden said in an address to the Congress: "We have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks Some people think the Federal Reserve Banks are United States government institutions. They are not government institutions. They are private credit monopolies which prey upon the people of the United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customersThe Federal Reserve Banks are the agents of the foreign central banks In that dark crew of financial pirates, there are those who would cut a man's throat to get a dollar out of his pocket Every effort has been made by the Federal Reserve Board to conceal its powers, but the truth is the Fed has usurped the government. It controls everything here (in Congress) and controls all our foreign relations. It makes and breaks governments at will When the Fed was passed, the people of the United States did not perceive that a world system was being set up A super-state controlled by international bankers, and international industrialists acting together to enslave the world for their own pleasure!"

The source is http://www.rense.com/general83/palint.ht...

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 21, 2008 at 2:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Wow Neo, you mean we actually agree on something? Democrats want to bring the Fairness doctorine back to try to muzzle people like Rush, Savage and Hannity.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 21, 2008 at 7:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Pretty much so even though there are exceptions... just look at all the billionaires, I'm pretty sure that they were born with the instinct to make money in the free market.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 21, 2008 at 7:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

No I do not. It's up to the Congress to come up with the plan. The President can make suggestions but it's the congress who appropriates the money, make regulations, attach strings to the bill. All the president can do is sign what congress puts in front of him or not.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 21, 2008 at 8:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

60 minites interview on Obama: Sad about the old lady's husband dying before he had a chance to vote for Obama but... being dead has never stopped a democrat from voting before... what's changed?

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 21, 2008 at 8:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I thought Palin's 15 minutes of fame was over and her draw was decreasing?:

“Sa-Rah! Sa-Rah!” they chanted at every mention of her name, applauding loudly and waiving tiny American flags that were distributed -- along with free water bottles -- by local volunteers. The fire chief estimated the crowd at 70,000.
http://www.tallahassee.com/apps/pbcs.dll...

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 21, 2008 at 8:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

It would depend on how big the majority is. They would still have to work with the republicans if it wasn't big enough... and I don't know what Reagan's relationship with Congress was to comment on that...

Posted by cashmere (anonymous) on September 21, 2008 at 10:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Congress has given up so much of its power to the executive branch, that they go along with a lot of what the president wants, no matter what party. They squall for political reasons, but in a crisis like this one, or terrorism, they sign anything. they were ready to flee the capital, but were forced to stay put and get a bill through bailing out Wall street.. the unfortunate reality is that unelected officials are running the show. look at the cover of Newsweek this week.

when Clinton came in, Greenspan and Rubin sat him down, and he changed a lot of what he was going to do. and this is the guy who everyone lauded for his great intelligence.

Posted by Slick77 (anonymous) on September 21, 2008 at 10:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Neo...catch up tomorrow, not avoiding you, it was a long day. Looks like Noesis and Cashmere helped out.
Neo, is it my imagination or are you softening up???
You and Noesis agreed on something? Stick around us Repubs and conservatives....it's doing you some good.
I can feel it, you're going toward the "light"!
Good Night

Posted by Shooter (anonymous) on September 22, 2008 at 8:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Amen Neo to the local forum. There will have to be a moderator. I nominate you, Neo, because you keep a cool head no matter how bizarre and off subject these comments gets.

P.S. Eat a bean............We need the gas

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 22, 2008 at 11:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Neo said: they will have to draw from the expertise of economists since neither McCain or Obama meet the requirements for being a world-class economist as agreed upon above.

Do you agree? If not, please explain.
__________________________________________________

No, I don't... Obama didn't have great foriegn policy credentials so what did he do, he got together what was it, 300-500 foriegn policy experts to be on his team.

Russia invaded Georgia. What did Obama's "experts" come up with? Hey, we'll get the U.N. security council to vote on a resolution condemning Russia!!!!

Someone forgot to tell all those experts that since Russia was a voting member of the council, they could easily veto the resolution.

I think Obama could have come up with a lame answer just as good as all his experts all by himself.

To get good answers, you need to ask the right questions.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 22, 2008 at 11:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Rusty Shackleford has posted the results of his and his Jawa team's investigation to determine the source of smears directed toward Sarah Palin. The smears include false allegations that she belonged to a secessionist political party and that she has radical anti-American views. Shackleford's research suggests that a subdivision of one of the largest public relations firms in the world most likely started and promulgated the rumors, that the rumors were spread in a surreptitious manner to avoid exposure and that the firm was paid by outside sources to run the smear campaign. While not conclusive, Shakleford's evidence suggests a link to the Barack Obama campaign.

Shackleford's report is "Hope, change & lies: Orchestrated 'grass roots' smear campaigns and the people who run them."

Posted by Slick77 (anonymous) on September 22, 2008 at 2:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Neo.... or anyone interested. You can go on ohiogop.org to get some info. or google Les Boggs Co. commissioner or stop by the Rep. Headquarters up on the hill. Their number is 532-0840. They supposedly have a brochure on the information you are looking for.
Neo....
p.s. They now have the bumper stickers and signs for McCain/Palin if you want one. I'll even pick them up for you!
"McCain 5% edge over Obama in(Ohio)"

Posted by Slick77 (anonymous) on September 22, 2008 at 4:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Neo....I just left the Rep. Headquarters, Les Boggs was there. We talked for a while, His forum and beliefs are being printed as we speak. He said he has retired from his other jobs, to do this full time, the only one to do this for commissioner. He wants to increase jobs here, and has a plan to save money, which you can read when you google his name. I saw it on there. He is very nice and accessible, if you want to speak with him.
He was a personal friend of my family since I was reallly young. I was gone for over 25 years and haven't seen him until now. Still the same good guy. Of course I am for the person with integrity, morals, and who cares about the community.
p.s. lots of signs and stickers for you there.......lol

Hope this helps you.

Posted by Slick77 (anonymous) on September 22, 2008 at 6:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Neo, I told you he was there and was willing to talk with you in person. I can get you the brochure when it comes out if you want. I was saying he was a good guy way before he came onto the local political scene. Way, Way, before. I knew him through church and family.
I know a "gameface" when I see it. Why do you think my name is "Slick"? My advice to you is to go see him and suggest these things in person. Share your ideas, etc.... You're good at taking control, you have the tenacity, go for it. What can you lose?

Posted by Slick77 (anonymous) on September 22, 2008 at 6:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Neo...You're right, nobody is beyond reproach.. That's one thing I've learned in my life. Did you want me to ask him to come on here? Have you already tried?? I am not bringing religion into it. We all have skeletons don't we? We learn from our mistakes. I believe his intentions are for the good.

Posted by Slick77 (anonymous) on September 22, 2008 at 7:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Neo..without giving out too much info. It takes me about 3-4 min. Remember, Ironton is about 3 miles long, and 1 mile wide. lol.......He had just walked in because I heard Burton Payne say Hello to him and how was your day. He probably got there right after quitting time. Takes about 2 min. from there. Why am I even responding to this....the things you say sometimes neo....lol. My sister worked for him. I kept up to date through her. p.s. Don't forget in Ironton you have to come to a complete stop and count to 10, otherwise you will get a big fat $160 ticket. Trust me, I've had 3 just since I moved back. Lived all over u.s. big cities, never had a ticket. The first week I moved back I got one for the stop sign thing. But, that's another forum right?
Another whole mess. That's why I said one thing this town needs is an enema!

Posted by Slick77 (anonymous) on September 22, 2008 at 8:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Neo...Never thought I would stoop this low...."Eat a bean"!

Posted by MasterChef (anonymous) on September 22, 2008 at 8:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Neo, earlier today when someone asked about Boggs website, said they looked, couldn't find it....
I did what I thought surely had been done. I typed in www.lesboggs.com and guess what? I found his website, boring as it was.

Posted by MasterChef (anonymous) on September 22, 2008 at 8:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

hey, slick!

Posted by Slick77 (anonymous) on September 22, 2008 at 8:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)

MasterChef, Hey....Neo was the one who couldn't find it. Tried to tell him. Do you guys want me to get Les to come on here? I can ask? Will that apieze you?
Did you read my last comment about our conversation? I appreciate your input and for having an open mind. Have a good evening.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 22, 2008 at 9:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Posted by Neo (anonymous) on September 21, 2008 at 8:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

And as for the congress, it's almost a certainty that it will be a democratic congress. Do you really think that if Obama came to them with proposals they'd just brush him out the door?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lets see how well they listen to the President:

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:...
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/0...

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 22, 2008 at 10 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Neo said: Then when I presented the premise, "To the extent that the President DOES HAVE any ability to impact the economy, they will have to draw from the expertise of economists since neither McCain or Obama meet the requirements for being a world-class economist as agreed upon above." and asked for a response you replied:

"No" and then changed the topic, going of into a discourse about foreign policy. If you want to talk about foreign policy, great. You're up next and I'd be glad to talk foreign policy. However, right now the discussion is economics.

So, let me ask this again. You agreed that neither Obama nor McCain are, themselves, world-class economists. If neither are world-class economists, they will have to rely on ADVICE FROM world class economists in making any decisions regarding the economy.

Do you agree? If not, please explain.

Thanks - Neo
_____________________________________________________

Neo, what I was pointing out by referencing the foreign policy experts is that it doesn't matter what discipline they are, so called "experts" aren't always right. Aren't these same "experts" the ones who got us into the mess in the first place?

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 22, 2008 at 10:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Two years ago, the Democrats, with great fanfare and much spiteful mirth, took control of both the U.S. House and the U.S. Senate promising great changes and great advances.

Are you better off …?

Just to review the bidding. On January 5, 2007 (just about the time Nancy Pelosi and her cronies took control of the House):
- The Dow Jones Industrial Average closed at about 12,400.
- The New York-based Conference Board said its consumer confidence index was at 110.3.

- The Bureau of Labor Statistics had the unemployment rate at 4.6%

- According to CNN gasoline a gallon of gasoline, in January 2007, averaged about $2.20.

That was then. This is now:
- Last Thursday at about 1 pm Eastern, the Dow had hit a bottom of about 10,500 before Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson and the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Ben Bernanke intervened. That is a drop of about 15% in the Dow from two years ago.
- The Conference Board's latest take on the pulse of consumer confidence had it at a very thready 56.9 in August - a drop of about 48%

- The unemployment rate in August was reported at 6.1% by the BLS an increase of 33%.

Gasoline prices are at about $3.70 a whopping 68% jump.

What's changed?
Rep. Barney Frank (D-Ma) and Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Ct) took control of the House and Senate Banking Committees.
Rep. George Miller (D-Ca) and Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Ma) took over their respective Labor Committees.

Rep. John Dingell (D-Mi) and Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) became chairs of the Energy Committees.

The McCain campaign should be pointing the finger where it belongs: On the appalling lack of oversight exhibited by the Democrat-controlled Congress of the United States.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 22, 2008 at 10:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Out of bounds! Obama scares elderly over Social Security
By Steven Thomma | McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON — Throw the flag against: Barack Obama. Call: Unsportsmanlike conduct. What happened: Obama played the fear card, telling the elderly they'd have lost their Social Security last week had John McCain been president.

"If my opponent had his way, the millions of Floridians who rely on it would've had their Social Security tied up in the stock market this week," Obama said.

"How do you think that would have made folks feel? Millions would've watched as the market tumbled and their nest egg disappeared before their eyes."

Obama rolled out the incendiary comments in Florida, home to a large retiree population and a crucial battleground state in the election. He trails McCain by nearly 3 percentage points there in an average of recent polls compiled by www.realclearpolitics.com.

Why that's wrong: McCain doesn't propose that the elderly divert their Social Security money into the stock market. He's said that he wants to allow younger workers — not current retirees or those close to it — to divert some of their Social Security taxes into privately managed accounts that could include stocks. He's said that he'd want a plan "along the lines of what President Bush proposed."

Bush said flat out in 2005 that current retirees and those close to retirement wouldn't be included and their benefits would remain exactly as they were now. Only those born after 1950 — 55 or younger at the time of Bush's proposal — would have the option of diverting some of their taxes into private accounts.

Posted by Slick77 (anonymous) on September 22, 2008 at 11:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey Noesis....Haven't heard from you for a while...Been busy? Pre-occupied? Good to read your comments again.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 23, 2008 at 7:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Neo, I already knew where you were going in this discussion and that's why I threw out the foreign policy experts... as a preemptive strike ;)

While I agree with your assessment on Obama's characteristics (and disagree with McCain's... he scored low in school because at the time, he didn't want to be there), we have a fundamental difference on the direction this country should be taken.

I believe in our founding fathers... They hated taxes with a passion. George Washington and others down the road had problems forming their armies and supplying them because the government did not want to tax the people.

I hate paying taxes. Anybody does. But... I know we need roads, the military and other essential services. I think EVERYONE should pay taxes, I don't care how rich or poor you are, you should contribute to the upkeep of this great nation. Even our poor have it better than the poor in other nations.

What Obama is proposing in his wealth redistribution is nothing less than class warfare. Hey, lets just have the rich pay for everything, they can afford it! What happens when taxes are increased on cigarettes to supply social programs? People smoke less, cross state lines, order off the internet and the revenue generated decreases. The same will happen if the rich are paying all the taxes. They are going to make their money and run with it. Why pay the stock markets in the states when they can go to an island nation with no taxes and play the stock market there for free... How about moving their headquarters there and save millions of dollars?

Our country was founded on the principle that any man could go out, work hard and prosper. I don't remember anything in our history that implied that he should go out, work hard prosper and give it to the government so the government could give it to those that didn't prosper.

I think our founding fathers would be rolling over in their graves in disgust if they could see what we have done with taxes.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 23, 2008 at 8:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)

New type of politics eh?

Closing the Whopper Gap

...But a series of new Obama attacks requires a rebalancing of the scales: Obama has descended to similarly scurrilous tactics on the stump and on the air. On immigration, Obama is running a Spanish-language ad that unfairly lumps McCain together with Rush Limbaugh -- and quotes Limbaugh out of context. On health care, Obama misleadingly accuses McCain of wanting to impose a $3.6 trillion tax hike on employer-provided insurance.

Obama has been furthest out of line, however, on Social Security, stooping to the kind of scare tactics he once derided.

"If my opponent had his way, the millions of Floridians who rely on it would have had their Social Security tied up in the stock market this week," Obama said Saturday as he campaigned in that retiree-heavy state. "Millions of families would've been scrambling to figure out how to give their mothers and fathers, their grandmothers and grandfathers, the secure retirement that every American deserves."

This is simply false -- even leaving aside the incendiary language about "privatizing" Social Security. As the invaluable FactCheck.org noted, the private account plan suggested by President Bush and backed by McCain would not have applied to anyone born before 1950. It would not have changed benefits by a single penny for current retirees like the nice Florida folks that Obama was trying to rile up. The sensible notion was that workers at or near retirement age should be able to rely on promised benefits and should not be subject to the vicissitudes of short-term market fluctuations...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con...

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 23, 2008 at 8:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Biden says ad that mocked McCain was 'terrible'

WASHINGTON (AP) - Barack Obama's running mate says a campaign ad that mocked Republican presidential candidate John McCain as an out-of-touch, out-of-date computer illiterate was "terrible" and would not have been done had he known about it.

Asked about the negative tone of the campaign, and this ad in particular, during an interview broadcast Monday by the "CBS Evening News," Obama's running mate, Sen. Joe Biden, said he disapproved of it.

"I thought that was terrible, by the way," Biden said.

Asked why it was done, he said: "I didn't know we did it and if I had anything to do with it, we'd have never done it."

Posted by MasterChef (anonymous) on September 23, 2008 at 9:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Morning, All!

Posted by Slick77 (anonymous) on September 23, 2008 at 10:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)

MasterChef..Good morning to you. Wow, "Liberals" and "Conservatives" getting along!! (For now anyway) lol
Have a good day, catch up with everyone later this evening. :)

Posted by Vil (anonymous) on September 23, 2008 at 1:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Neo, please stop reporting stories and lies from the far left liberal sites. It really cheapens any opinion people may have of you and your opinions. Let us move from the half truths that get blown out of proportion.

Saying he has 'literally bought American cars all his life' doesn't mean he hasn't bought foreign cars too.

My family owns two Japanese models because they are superior vehicles compared to anything the American companies have put out. I buy American as long as it is quality.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 23, 2008 at 2:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Posted by Neo (anonymous) on September 23, 2008 at 8:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"Loan Titans Paid McCain Adviser Nearly $2 Million "

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/22/us/pol......

"Senator John McCain’s campaign manager was paid more than $30,000 a month for five years as president of an advocacy group set up by the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to defend them against stricter regulations, current and former officials say...."
______________________________________________________

And the guy who is actually running for President... that would be Obama was given $123,000 by Fannie and Freddie in just two years.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 23, 2008 at 3:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)

More democratic flip-flops:

Biden: 'No coal plants here in America'

Some great rope line video from Joe Biden's recent Ohio swing, where he was asked by an anti-pollution campaigner about clean coal -- a controversial approach in Democratic circles for which Obama has voiced support, particularly during the Kentucky primary.

Biden's apparent answer: He supports clean coal for China, but not for the United States.

"No coal plants here in America," he said. "Build them, if they're going to build them, over there. Make them clean."

"We’re not supporting clean coal," he said of himself and Obama.

And here was just a few days ago...

....just three days ago, he praised the possibilities of coal to a crowd at the United Mine Workers of America annual fish fry in Castlewood, Va.

“You know we have enough coal in the United States of America to meet out needs domestically for the better part of the next hundred to 200 years,” Biden said before launching into a critique of McCain’s energy priorities, slamming his support for billions in tax breaks for oil companies as the industry rakes in record profits.

“Imagine ... what Barack and I can do taking that $4 billion … and investing it in coal gasification, finding out what we can do with carbon sequestration, finding out how we can burn the coal that you dig that can free us from being dependent on foreign oil countries and at the same time not ruin the environment. That’s within our capacity to do it, if you give me $4 billion I promise you, I promise you we will find the answer,” Biden said.

He linked the ticket’s support for coal with their call to have U.S. automakers produce plug-in electric cars. “Where’s that [electricity] come from? That comes from a utility. What do utilities burn? They burn coal mostly.”
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0...

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 23, 2008 at 3:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Neo, would you agree that "No taxation without representation" was the major reason that the colonies went to war with England... It was the colonialist's belief that since they had no representation in the English courts, taxation on them was illegal.

Pretty profound concept if you ask me... But, that brings up an interesting question... If people aren't being taxed, why should they be represented? Since the rich are paying all the taxes, shouldn't THEY be the ones who are being represented???

Our founding fathers had a pretty good idea who should vote... only those people who owned land. Was that because they knew that people who worked and had money bought land?

No taxation without representation... so, if people aren't taxed/pay no taxes, should they have the right to vote?

Posted by AlisonMiller (anonymous) on September 23, 2008 at 5 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Neo, earlier today when someone asked about Boggs website, said they looked, couldn't find it...."

MC--That was me--I only Google. I like to read the description before I go there.

Posted by AlisonMiller (anonymous) on September 23, 2008 at 5:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Dumb, I know.

Posted by MasterChef (anonymous) on September 23, 2008 at 7:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey, AM. With all the pastes, cut and pastes, and cut and pastes over those, its easy to get confused. -MC

Posted by MasterChef (anonymous) on September 23, 2008 at 7:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)

How do the rich get rich? Hard work, rarely. The country was built on the backs of poor people who paid no tax. It was their sweat and labor that made the rich person rich.

So, should people who don't pay taxes be represented? HELL YES! They can't depend on rich republicans to not take advantage of them.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 23, 2008 at 9:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

No, this country was built by farmers and frontiersman.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 23, 2008 at 9:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey MasterChef and Neo, I have a quote for you: 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, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Posted by 79Tiger (anonymous) on September 23, 2008 at 9:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Is nobody going to note the reason why the answers to the quiz were horrible, including the author of the article?

Government run schools. Like everything they get their hands on, the government proves itself inept at everything. History is not even taught any longer because the liberal educators are ashamed of this country and do not want the people to know the true meaning of the founding of this country and its'historical importance. The only successful government entity is the U.S. military and that is due more so to the soldiers than the bureaucracy. The soldiers do with less because of the fraud in the bureaucracy but they still find a way to be successful on the battlefield. If you are going to write an artical about the failings of the American people, you can at least admit and point out in the same article the reason why.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 6:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Neo, I stand corrected on the "No taxation without representation" was the major reason that the colonies went to war . I was basing what I said on the following:

"No taxation without representation" began as a slogan in the period 1763–1776 that summarized a primary grievance of the British colonists in the Thirteen Colonies. In short, many in those colonies believed the lack of direct representation in the distant British Parliament was an illegal denial of their rights as Englishmen, and therefore laws taxing the colonists (the kind of law that affects the most individuals directly), and other laws applying only to the colonies, were unconstitutional.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_taxation...

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 6:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Posted by Neo

Noesis, as for your other post, I'm not an expert on Barney Frank's political views. I have read/heard a few sources, though, suggesting that Paulsen/Bernanke/Cox might be exaggerating the situation as a power grab.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My point was Neo that Bush tried in 2003 to reform Freddy and Fannie.

New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae
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.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.ht...

It was democrat "experts" Like Barney who stated that there were no financial problems with Freddy and Fannie and that more regulation would lead to less housing affordable to the poor so they fought what Bush wanted and... The EXACT reason we have this problem today.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 7:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Neo: have read/heard a few sources, though, suggesting that Paulsen/Bernanke/Cox might be exaggerating the situation as a power grab. I don't know about that. I've also heard a number of people, including Obama and McCain, that they would not want to see one man...Hank Paulsen...with sole control over the $700 million to $` trillion fund with absolute power...no review of his decisions by any court or legislative body.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh give me a break!!!! Exaggerating the situation as a power grab? You don't think it would be the same if it was only $300 billion (I hope your 700 million was a typo). And I don't think any of those guys are exaggerating... I think it's the markets and the experts who are saying this.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 7:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Neo, this gets back to Obama surrounding himself with economic experts... Barney Frank would be considered an "economic expert" that Obama would use to help set policy. Barney's overriding interest was not to do what was best for Fannie and Freddy but to his democratic beliefs... that the poor have a higher priority than the financial stability of the banking system.

Bush made the right call on Freddy and Fannie and the democrats fought him. The democrats and their "affordable housing for the poor" are the sole reason that we are in this predicament today.

Posted by MasterChef (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 7:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Without using Google I don't know what the Congressional balance was in 2003. But yesterday afternoon the ass't whitehouse press secretary, during a briefing, said Dumya had this plan ready to roll months ago, but waited until now to reveal it.

Once again Congress is asked to follow Dumya blindly.

Posted by AlisonMiller (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 8:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"No, this country was built by farmers and frontiersman."

Don't forget the slaves.

Posted by MasterChef (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 9:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)

and the slave crews used to row the merchant ships back and forth

Posted by MasterChef (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 9:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Buffet just made $500M by investing $5B in Goldman.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 11:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Posted by Neo: "As for regulation, Obama has been for it all along and McCain was against it until last week."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL HOUSING ENTERPRISE REGULATORY REFORM ACT OF 2005

The United States Senate

May 25, 2006
Section 16
McCain: Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae's regulator reported that the company's quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were "illusions deliberately and systematically created" by the company's senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal...
...For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac--known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs--and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO's report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO's report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.

I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.

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

Now Neo, you were saying???

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 11:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)

And Neo you left out two key players in the fraud scheme... One is the buyers themselves. Over-reporting their income AND being foolish enough for taking an ARM. When I bought this current house, they tried pushing an ARM on me. I asked what it was. They said they would knock off about a point of my interest rate. I asked what the difference was between the normal rate and the ARM. They said that the ARM follows the interest rates and my payments would go up if the rates did. I told them no thanks. Many people were stupid thinking that it would never go up. They had no business buying houses they couldn't afford.

The second group was real estate agents, They knew what these people could and couldn't afford but used ARM's to shoehorn people into houses they couldn't afford, just so their commission would be larger.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 12:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Neo: "I was saying that according to his own statements on the campaign trail that John McCain was "fundamentally a deregulator"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow Neo, pretty good attempt at spin here... I have to give you credit. McCain is against regulation and Obama for it.... But you left out the facts....McCain attempted to regulate it and democrats and Obama is against regulating the institutions that gave bad loans to poor people:

...But the 2005 bill didn't become law, for a simple reason: Democrats opposed it on a party-line vote in the committee, signaling that this would be a partisan issue. Republicans, tied in knots by the tight Democratic opposition, couldn't even get the Senate to vote on the matter. (would have Obama voted against his party? It would have been highly unusual... and, think about all those poor people in Chicago who couldn't afford homes if he voted for more regulations)

But we now know that many of the senators who protected Fannie and Freddie, including Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Christopher Dodd, have received mind-boggling levels of financial support from them over the years.

Throughout his political career, Obama has gotten more than $125,000 in campaign contributions from employees and political action committees of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, second only to Dodd, the Senate Banking Committee chairman, who received more than $165,000.

Clinton, the 12th-ranked recipient of Fannie and Freddie PAC and employee contributions, has received more than $75,000 from the two enterprises and their employees. The private profit found its way back to the senators who killed the fix.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=n...

Posted by Slick77 (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 4:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

AlisonMiller........the "slaves", to correct you they were the "enslaved" peoples. Yes, the "enslaved" played a major part in helping America and its prosperity.

Posted by MasterChef (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 8:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

so, noesis, in talking about healthcare, McBush didn't say, "WE'LL deregulate healthcare just as WE did banking"?

Doesn't sound like alarm bells going off to me.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 8:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

No MasterChef, Lets see what the NYTimes says about that issue:

But by making questionable assertions about the roots of the crisis and then making a link to Mr. McCain’s health care plans, Mr. Obama opens himself to the same criticism that Mr. McCain has faced about the truthfulness of his attacks.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/...

Posted by MasterChef (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 8:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I don't need your stinkin' link for this one, because I heard it myself.

McBush/Palin = incontinent/incompetent

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 9:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Before the Democrats' affirmative action lending policies became an embarrassment, the Los Angeles Times reported that, starting in 1992, a majority-Democratic Congress "mandated that Fannie and Freddie increase their purchases of mortgages for low-income and medium-income borrowers. Operating under that requirement, Fannie Mae, in particular, has been aggressive and creative in stimulating minority gains."

Under Clinton, the entire federal government put massive pressure on banks to grant more mortgages to the poor and minorities. Clinton's secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Andrew Cuomo, investigated Fannie Mae for racial discrimination and proposed that 50 percent of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's portfolio be made up of loans to low- to moderate-income borrowers by the year 2001.

Threatening lawsuits, Clinton's Federal Reserve demanded that banks treat welfare payments and unemployment benefits as valid income sources to qualify for a mortgage. That isn't a joke -- it's a fact.

When Democrats controlled both the executive and legislative branches, political correctness was given a veto over sound business practices.

In 1999, liberals were bragging about extending affirmative action to the financial sector. Los Angeles Times reporter Ron Brownstein hailed the Clinton administration's affirmative action lending policies as one of the "hidden success stories" of the Clinton administration, saying that "black and Latino homeownership has surged to the highest level ever recorded."

Meanwhile, economists were screaming from the rooftops that the Democrats were forcing mortgage lenders to issue loans that would fail the moment the housing market slowed and deadbeat borrowers couldn't get out of their loans by selling their houses.