Print this story |
E-mail story |
This story has 65 comments Add your own |
iPod friendly | Bookmark this
What is this?
Bush: Bailout will stabilize economy
Originally published 12:42 p.m., September 29, 2008
Updated 12:42 p.m., September 29, 2008
WASHINGTON — President Bush urged Congress Monday morning to pass the compromise financial system bailout bill that leading lawmakers fashioned in marathon weekend bargaining, saying it is needed to ‘‘keep the crisis in our financial industry from spreading’’ across the economy.
Bush made the statement at the White House, and he also sought to assure Americans that approving his administration’s $700 billion rescue plan is the right thing to do. Bush spoke amid continued nervousness in financial markets at home and overseas.
Bush argued that jittery U.S. taxpayers will benefit from a number of safeguards that lawmakers wrote into the pending legislation during weekend negotiations on Capitol Hill, including checks and balances on the operation of the program.
The president spoke shortly after two leading players in the Hill bargaining went on television news shows to urge passage, even as both acknowledged the necessity of this action represents a sad day for the nation.
Asked if the compromise bill indeed will go through Congress, Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., replied: ‘‘We hope so.’’
But the Connecticut senator, chairman of the Banking Committee, also said the bill is not a panacea for all the problems that have bedeviled the U.S. financial markets. He also said, though, that failure to act would spread the contagion of frozen credit markets even further. ‘‘This is not just about Wall Street,’’ Dodd said. He said that it’s ‘‘potentially going to hurt other people across the country.’’
Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., who represented fellow Republicans in the weekend talks, called it a ‘‘tourniquet’’ for the ailing financial industry and slow-moving economy.
The latest assessments of prospects for passage came as investors worldwide and in early trading in the United States continued to show doubt about whether the bill would go through, much less go a long way toward curing the systemic problems that have unnerved financial markets across the globe for weeks.
The House was slated to vote later Monday on the deeply unpopular rescue package for the stressed financial industry. Bush on Sunday conceded this was a difficult vote in an election year — and repeated that sentiment in his statement Monday morning.
But he called a vote for the bill ‘‘a vote to prevent economic damage’’ to communities across the country.
He also said the legislation addresses the root cause of the problem — ‘‘assets related to home mortgages that have lost value during the housing decline.’’
And the president noted that under provisions of the pending bill, ‘‘the federal government will be authorized to purchase these assets’’ and said that will help financial institutions to resume lending to individuals and businesses.
‘‘I know many Americans are worried about the cost of the bill,’’ Bush said. But he also said the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office and the federal Office of Management and Budget expect that the ‘‘ultimate cost to the taxpayer’’ will be much less.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SHARE THIS STORY?
Comments
Posted by ddd (anonymous) on September 29, 2008 at 2:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
He was ignored in the HR. The bill failed with many Republicans voting against it. Mc Cain rallied his voters.
Posted by padanorr (David A. Norris) on September 29, 2008 at 2:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Merchana the bill failed with MANY Democrats voting against it!! The Democrats have the majority and could have passed this bill without a single Republican voting for it.
The bail-out plan failed in the house 205-228. There are 235 Democrats in the House and 199 Republicans. Of 235 Democrats, only 141 supported the legislation. Of 199 Republicans, 132 opposed it.
Opponents said part of the reason for the opposition from Republicans was what they termed a partisan speech by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi prior to the vote.
"Pelosi's partisan speech has caused our members to go berserk and may cost us any remaining chance to pass the bill," the source said
Pelosi had said that Congress needed to pass the bill, even though it was an outgrowth of the "failed economic policies" of the last eight years.
"When was the last time someone asked you for $700 billion?" she asked. "It is a number that is staggering, but tells us only the costs of the Bush administration's failed economic policies — policies built on budgetary recklessness, on an anything goes mentality, with no regulation, no supervision, and no discipline in the system." - Nancy Pelosi prior to vote
-------------
Nancy Pelosi this was not the time to open your mouth for partisan speech. Also you don't get it. This financial melt-down has more to do with Bill Clinton's social experiment in housing for everyone than so called failed Bush policies. It was Democrat backed policies that put the financial markets in this mess they are now in ...
Watch this video if you don't believe me ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7...
Posted by padanorr (David A. Norris) on September 29, 2008 at 4:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Posted by Neo (anonymous) on September 29, 2008 at 4:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Stunning Defeat for Bailout Plan Torpedoes Stocks; Dow Sinks Over 750
http://finance.yahoo.com/
Want 4 more years?
-------------
No I don't want 4 more years and if you elect Barack Obama it will be 100 times worse.
McCain/Palin
Posted by padanorr (David A. Norris) on September 29, 2008 at 4:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Neo ...
why are you remaining anonymous? Put your name on your posts like I have ...
Posted by padanorr (David A. Norris) on September 29, 2008 at 6:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Posted by Neo on September 29, 2008 at 4:51 p.m.
How was the derivative market today?
-------------
There was a $3.26 move on the QQQQ's index to the downside. If you purchased the correct PUTS on QQQQ's at the correct time you could have realized an 82% return on investment in one day.
Posted by cashmere (anonymous) on September 29, 2008 at 7 p.m. (Suggest removal)
four more years? of weak Demo leadership? they had the votes for what they characterized as a needed bill to save the American economy. Yet they demanded Republican "cover". So Republicans screwed everything up according to them, but are needed as "cover".
Control of government means more than power, it means leadership, and that was sorely lacking today.
on a personal note, Nancy Pelosi, your earrings were WAY too heavy for your ear lobes today.
Posted by cashmere (anonymous) on September 29, 2008 at 7:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
if obama's tax increases on "wealthy" businesses cause my boss to downsize and I lose my job, my Obama tax rebate won't help me much will they?
oh, I forgot, earned income tax credits, welfare, and food stamps... and a medical card!! I feel better now, life is good.
Posted by cashmere (anonymous) on September 29, 2008 at 8:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
my job can't be exported overseas....plus, why not ship jobs overseas? don't we care about the middle class in India? don't we embrace globalization?
I'm middle class, and my life has gotten better in the last 8 years. My income has quintipled, if that is a word!
I liked my 2001 Bush tax cut. I bought my daughter a computer. I liked my economic stimulus this summer, it paid for some of my daughter's tuition. I liked the $5000 tax refund I got because of tuition tax credits(yes, I admit that started under Clinton).
but I'm one of those silly middle class people with no stocks, little credit card debt, a house, and a car that is paid for. I'm not waiting for Obama to save me.
Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 29, 2008 at 8:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The CRA was passed by the 95th United States Congress and signed into law by President Jimmy Carter in 1977 as a result of national grassroots pressure for affordable housing, and despite considerable opposition from the mainstream banking community.
The bill encouraged mortgage lending through two government sponsored enterprises ("GSEs"). One, the Federal National Mortgage Association, commonly known as Fannie Mae, enables mortgage companies, savings and loans, commercial banks, credit unions, and state and local housing finance agencies to lend to home buyers. The other, the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, commonly known as Freddie Mac, buys mortgages on the secondary market and sells them as mortgage-backed securities on the open market.
H. W. Bush Administration Changes of 1989
The Financial Institutions Reform Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA), enacted in the wake of the savings and loan crisis of the 1980s, increased public oversight of the process. It required the agencies to issue CRA ratings publicly and written performance evaluations using facts and data to support the agencies' conclusions. It also required a four-tiered CRA examination rating system with performance levels of "Outstanding," "Satisfactory," "Needs to Improve," or "Substantial Noncompliance."
Clinton Administration Changes of 1995
In early 1993 President Bill Clinton ordered new regulations for the CRA which would increase access to mortgage credit for inner city and distressed rural communities.[7] The new rules went into effect on January 31, 1995 and featured: requiring strictly numerical assessments to get a satisfactory CRA rating; using federal home-loan data broken down by neighborhood, income group, and race; encouraging community groups to complain when banks were not loaning enough to specified neighborhood, income group, and race; allowing community groups that marketed loans to targeted groups to collect a fee from the banks.
The new rules, during a time when many banks were merging and needed to pass the CRA review process to do so, substantially increased the number and aggregate amount of loans to low- and moderate-income borrowers for home loans, some of which were "risky mortgages."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_R......
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This crisis was caused by democratic policies... and you want to elect them again?
Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 29, 2008 at 8:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
No Neo, Obama is about class warfare, socialism. Taking from the rich and giving it to the poor.
Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 29, 2008 at 8:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)
So Neo, what's your plan now? Try to get Dave fired from his job because he's a republican? Let Obama know where he lives? Rally your crew to complain? Your type of thugish antics are the only reason I won't put my name on here.
Posted by cashmere (anonymous) on September 29, 2008 at 8:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
$4000 would be nice, but since I got $5000 in total, and she didn't have to do any community service, so I'm not complaining.
it just seems as if every president wants to promote the middle class, but many programs keep people in the underclass....it's hard to break free. And the upper classes won't give up their profits, they just pass any taxes to the middle class employees.
Neo, I think you idealize Obama. I will would like you to make one criticism of him. it's optional. I also think you idealize his ability to control Congress, albeit a Democratic one. 94 Demos did not vote for this bailout, despite being in the majority. It's not cut and dried, as any president could tell you.
Posted by keta (anonymous) on September 29, 2008 at 8:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It's naive not to consider political reality, the cost of voting for something most of your constituents hate and want you to vote against. Democrats had promised the number of Democratic votes needed to pass this stinker, and Republicans had promised the remainder of votes needed. It would have been really stupid for Democrats to do it any other way, to get themselves in a position where they're totally responsible for something so unpopular. 36 days before an election, why should they have to shoulder the whole toxic mess and let the party of deregulation escape the fallout? Rush Limbaugh and Bill O' Reilly can call it "cover" - the rest of us call it justice. House Republicans can honor their commitment, or not. They can get their shorts in a wad about Pelosi's completely factual remarks about how we got into this mess, or not. Who cares? Barack Obama will preside over a nation in a deep, painful recession, no matter what happens.
Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 29, 2008 at 8:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Now Palin is going to have to step up to the plate and, trust me, it will be a disaster. Biden doesn't have to say one word to her. She will tank just on the basis of the questions asked by the moderator."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Riiiiiight and you claimed that Obama would "destroy" McCain in the debate. Why should your current or any other analysis be taken at face value.
Posted by padanorr (David A. Norris) on September 29, 2008 at 8:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Posted by Neo (anonymous) on September 29, 2008 at 8:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 29, 2008 at 8:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
No Neo, Obama is about class warfare, socialism. Taking from the rich and giving it to the poor.
-------------
Your remark was ignorant Neo. That is exactly what Obama is all about, class warefare, socialism and pretending he is robin hood ... taking from the rich to give to the poor ... As I stated in another article Senator Obama is a parasite of the worst kind. He will only weaken the economy and kill jobs.
And for the record I am totally against the bail out plan or rescue. The markets will correct themselves if left alone, but we will never see that because the bail out will happen eventually.
Posted by padanorr (David A. Norris) on September 29, 2008 at 8:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 29, 2008 at 8:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)
So Neo, what's your plan now? Try to get Dave fired from his job because he's a republican? Let Obama know where he lives? Rally your crew to complain? Your type of thugish antics are the only reason I won't put my name on here.
------
Noesis ... isn't that what Obama is about? Eliminating his competition ... He did that running for State Senator and he is currently doing it in Missouri with his truth squads, using prosectutors and law enforcement to squealch free speech?
Posted by keta (anonymous) on September 29, 2008 at 8:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Noesis, I can't believe you're still saying things like, Obama is about class warfare and socialism. Republican policies are forcing socialism by the hour, and if anyone ever doubted that there's a war on the middle class and the middle class is getting pounded, go buy a newspaper or turn on your TV. The party of fiscal responsibility has exploded. There's a war on, and John McCain is urging you to go to the polls in a few weeks and surrender.
Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 29, 2008 at 8:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
No Keta... or should I say Patricia... the ramblings sound about the same. It's the democrats who were responsible for this crisis by FORCING banks to make mortgages available to people who used food stamps as proof of income.
Posted by padanorr (David A. Norris) on September 29, 2008 at 9 p.m. (Suggest removal)
keta ... this mess just did not just happen in the last 4 or even 8 years.
This mess was created by liberal ideology starting with Jimmy Carter and the need for Democrats to pander to the middle class and poor and minorities. Bush, McCain and a list of Republican's sounded the alarm over and over ....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7...
Posted by cashmere (anonymous) on September 29, 2008 at 9:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
if this bailout is such a wonderful, honorable thing, why did the Demos need cover? why wouldn't they want to take full credit?
I agree, Pelosi's remarks shouldn't be enough to make someone switch their vote, but it was impolitic of her to make that speech at that moment. You don't insult your enemies just when they have agreed to help you. after the vote, Pelosi could make speeches all night!
In a delicate vote, you keep your mouth shut if it's going to cost votes.
Posted by keta (anonymous) on September 29, 2008 at 10:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Who said the bailout is wonderful or honorable? Who's Patricia? Whose fault is all this again - Carter or Clinton or Obama? Are you kidding? Shame on you, Al Gore - you've wrecked the economy. Nah. Shame on you, John Kerry, you effete snob - you've wrecked the economy. Nah. Shame on you, Walter Mondale.....
Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 29, 2008 at 11:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Patracia Littlejohn... your statements are about as full of facts as hers are... This mess was caused by the CRA which required banks to make bad loans. This program wasn't pushed by republicans, it's all democrats.
Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 29, 2008 at 11:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Posted by keta:
Whose fault is all this again - Carter or Clinton or Obama?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This pretty much somes it up:
Clinton Administration Changes of 1995
In early 1993 President Bill Clinton ordered new regulations for the CRA which would increase access to mortgage credit for inner city and distressed rural communities...
The new rules, during a time when many banks were merging and needed to pass the CRA review process to do so, substantially increased the number and aggregate amount of loans to low- and moderate-income borrowers for home loans, some of which were "risky mortgages."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_R.........
Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 30, 2008 at 1:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Neo, it's bad loans to people who couldn't afford it (people on assistance) or slightly above it that caused this mess. How is it disgraceful pointing out the truth?
With your recent run of hate Neo, I'm really suprised you haven't gotten a lifetime ban. I'm sure it won't be long in coming.
Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 30, 2008 at 1:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Neo: The vast majority of those who saw the debate believed that Obama won.
http://webcenter.polls.aol.com/modular.j...
Poll Results
Who won the debate?
John McCain 45% 238,903
Barack Obama 42% 222,854
It was a tie 8% 40,047
I didn't watch 5% 26,941
Note on Poll Results
Total Votes: 528,745
Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 30, 2008 at 1:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)
People, don't let Neo try to fool you. He tries to blame this on Bush but it's democrats who wanted housing for the poor that caused this mess. People were allowed to use food stamps as part of their "total income". Democrats forced banks to give mortages to the poor. If they didn't, they would be penaltized by the government. It's democrats who fought regulation.
Just remeber Barny Franks immortal words:
"These two entities, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not facing any kind of financial crisis, 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 Noesis (anonymous) on September 30, 2008 at 2:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Even Bill Clinton blames democrats for this mess:
http://vodpod.com/watch/1033567-bill-cli...
Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 30, 2008 at 2:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Not when I have days off
Posted by Vil (anonymous) on September 30, 2008 at 2:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
OK, so Clinton's failed policies are now the Republicans' fault?
WOW!
Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 30, 2008 at 2:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The CRA was passed by the 95th United States Congress and signed into law by President Jimmy Carter in 1977 as a result of national grassroots pressure for affordable housing, and despite considerable opposition from the mainstream banking community.
The CRA MANDATES that each banking institution be evaluated to determine if it has met the credit needs of its entire community. That record is taken into account when the federal government considers an institution's application for deposit facilities, including mergers and acquisitions.
The bill encouraged mortgage lending through two government sponsored enterprises ("GSEs"). One, the Federal National Mortgage Association, commonly known as Fannie Mae, enables mortgage companies, savings and loans, commercial banks, credit unions, and state and local housing finance agencies to lend to home buyers.
In early 1993 President Bill Clinton ordered new regulations for the CRA which would increase access to mortgage credit for inner city and distressed rural communities. The new rules went into effect on January 31, 1995 and featured: requiring strictly numerical assessments to get a satisfactory CRA rating
The new rules, during a time when many banks were merging and needed to pass the CRA review process to do so, substantially increased the number and aggregate amount of loans to low- and moderate-income borrowers for home loans, some of which were "risky mortgages
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_R...
Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 30, 2008 at 2:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Vil, the one thing that can turn this election around is if the general public finds out the truth that the democrats were the cause of this fiasco. Neo is in full spin mode.
Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 30, 2008 at 2:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Posted by Neo: Posting from work again?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Would it be any of your business if I was?
Posted by Vil (anonymous) on September 30, 2008 at 2:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)
And you think Joe Biden is ready to be President?
I'm voting for the moose hunter.
Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 30, 2008 at 3:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Neo, Palin is more of a man than most Obambi supporters..
Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 30, 2008 at 7:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Neo, maybe that's why you fear her so much.
Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 30, 2008 at 7:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Whoops... I guess we won't hear anymore posters talk about McCain saying that the fundamentals of the economy are strong...
Campaigning in Colorado on Monday, the day the market plunged 777.68 points, Obama proclaimed: "We've got the long-term fundamentals that will really make sure this economy grows."
Posted by padanorr (David A. Norris) on September 30, 2008 at 8:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Country First or Obama First?
COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) - Lagging in the polls, Republican presidential candidate John McCain unleashed a blistering attack Monday on his Democratic rival, saying the race comes down to a simple question: "Country first or Obama first?"
In his first public appearance since Friday night's debate, McCain said Democrat Barack Obama advocates tax-and-spend policies that "will deepen our recession," and voted against funding for equipment needed by troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
"That is not putting the men and women of our military first," he said.
Later in the day, after a stunning rejection by the House of a bailout of the financial industry, McCain said Obama and his allies had "infused unnecessary partisanship" into the effort to steady the economy.
"Now is not the time to fix the blame; it's time to fix the problem," he said, speaking to reporters in Iowa.
Posted by padanorr (David A. Norris) on September 30, 2008 at 9:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The Numbers: Obama, Pelosi, and Frank failed
CNN is in overdrive blaming the Republicans for killing the bailout. This morning they ran a story headlined "The Death of the American Dream" about how angry the public is and how the bailout would have helped people, even though people are so angry and blaming Wall Street the people did not want the bailout.
In any event, consider these numbers:
Number of additional votes needed to pass the bailout: 12
Number of Democrats on Barney Frank's committee who voted no: 12
Number of Democrats total who voted no on the plan: 95
Had Frank been able to control his committee or Pelosi the Democrats or had Barack Obama bothered to pick up the phone to support the plan he favored, it would have passed.
Aides to Mr. Obama said he had not directly reached out to try to sway any House Democrats who opposed the measure.
Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 30, 2008 at 9:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
...The one man who truly tried to treat this crisis like a crisis -- McCain -- was ridiculed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who implored him to come to Washington to help in the first place. And the news media, which now treat any Republican action that threatens a Barack Obama victory as inherently dishonorable, uncritically accepted the bald Democratic lie that McCain ruined a bipartisan bailout deal last Friday. http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/comm...
Posted by osu (anonymous) on September 30, 2008 at 9:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)
There was a deal until JOHN MCCAIN showed up in DC on his proverbial "white horse."
John McCain couldn't lead the Republicans in the House (which is why he said he was there), so why should we believe he could lead the country? If he can't lead his Party, why can't he lead his country?
At least Pelosi garnered the support of 67% of the Democrats--surpassing the goal of having 120 on board! And I don't like Pelosi, but I give her credit.
Posted by padanorr (David A. Norris) on September 30, 2008 at 9:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Posted by osu (anonymous) on September 30, 2008 at 9:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)
There was a deal until JOHN MCCAIN showed up in DC on his proverbial "white horse."
John McCain couldn't lead the Republicans in the House (which is why he said he was there), so why should we believe he could lead the country? If he can't lead his Party, why can't he lead his country?
At least Pelosi garnered the support of 67% of the Democrats--surpassing the goal of having 120 on board! And I don't like Pelosi, but I give her credit.
-------------
Prior to McCain suspending his campaign and going to Washington there was NO deal. Democrats had not even consulted Republican minority leaders about a deal prior to McCain's arrival in Washington.
Posted by padanorr (David A. Norris) on September 30, 2008 at 10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
..... another sick move by the Obama campaign
Obama sought rape victim for ad
Barack Obama's campaign earlier this month sought to find a rape victim to appear in a campaign commercial, according to an e-mail obtained by Politico.
Kiersten Steward, director of public policy at the Family Violence Prevention Fund, served as a conduit between the campaign and victims and women's advocates.
"Obviously, this is a big ask and I haven’t seen a script but presumably it will be a brief 'this is what happened to me, we need someone who will fight for women like me, these are the guys to do it,'" Steward wrote in a Sept. 15 e-mail. "Again, that’s just my assumption, given how these things
usually go."
http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanma...
Posted by padanorr (David A. Norris) on September 30, 2008 at 10:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Commentary: Bankruptcy, not bailout, is the right answer
Commentary from Jeffrey A. Miron. A senior lecturer in economics at Harvard University and one of 166 academic economists who signed a letter to congressional leaders last week opposing the government bailout plan.
Good read ...
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/29/m...
Posted by padanorr (David A. Norris) on September 30, 2008 at 11:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Karl Marx's comeback??
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs...
Posted by padanorr (David A. Norris) on September 30, 2008 at 11:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)
If this does not make you stop and think ...
Sing for Change Obama
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TW9b0xr06...
BUND DEUTSCHER MÄDEL IN DER HITLER-JUGEND
Translated (BUND GERMAN GIRLS IN THE HITLER YOUTH)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jo0DRtV4V...
Posted by osu (anonymous) on September 30, 2008 at 11:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)
McCain did NOT suspend his campaign. Palin was out there trying to utter a complete sentence, and McCain's surrogates were on the networks. McCain himself was still campaigning during the "suspension." It was a political trick that completely back-fired.
There was a deal until he showed up and stirred everyone up. And now it seems the RNC had produced and shipped a television advertisement to TV stations BEFORE Nancy Pelosi even spoke on the House floor.
Posted by padanorr (David A. Norris) on September 30, 2008 at 12:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I have a suggestion for all those that believe with Obama that the vile rich business owers should be forced to pay more of their fair share in the form of a tax increase.
Everyone that believes that way should immediately, right now quit your jobs and immediately to to work for a poor person.
If you believe in trickle up and you really believe that the evil rich should pay more then follow that belief up with action. Turn in your resignations today!! and immediately find a poor person to provide you a job.
Posted by AlisonMiller (anonymous) on September 30, 2008 at 12:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It seems from some of what I hear, people are trying to blame all of the Republicrats for this problem---what about the American citizens who walked into their mortgages KNOWING that they couldn't really afford their homes if anything out of the blue happened to them?
It is sounding like some of us are trying to blame the poorer, inner-city folks for the problem. The folks I know who are having trouble with their mortgages are the ones who were trying to be a bigger deal than they really are.
Posted by padanorr (David A. Norris) on September 30, 2008 at 12:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
WHAT exactly does a "community organizer" do?
Barack Obama's rise has left many Americans asking themselves that question. Here's a big part of the answer:
Community organizers intimidate banks into making high-risk loans to customers with poor credit.
In the name of fairness to minorities, community organizers occupy private offices, chant inside bank lobbies, and confront executives at their homes - and thereby force financial institutions to direct hundreds of millions of dollars in mortgages to low-credit customers.
In other words, community organizers help to undermine the US economy by pushing the banking system into a sinkhole of bad loans. And Obama has spent years training and funding the organizers who do it.
THE seeds of today's financial meltdown lie in the Commu nity Reinvestment Act - a law passed in 1977 and made riskier by unwise amendments and regulatory rulings in later decades.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/09292008/pos...
Posted by AlisonMiller (anonymous) on September 30, 2008 at 12:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Also, we can't forget those poor unfortunate renters who are being tossed out on their rears (even though they're paid up) b/c of the landlords who can't pay their mortgages either.
I think trying to provide access to a home is a good idea--haven't you guys heard of Maslow?
Greedy people took advantage--that's why we're looking to socialism to fix our problems.
Posted by padanorr (David A. Norris) on September 30, 2008 at 12:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Sarah Palin said yesterday she's eager to debate Joe Biden, and revved up supporters with a zinger about the difference in their ages.
"It's my turn now. I'm looking forward to Thursday night's debate," Palin told supporters in Ohio.
"I've never met Joe Biden. But I've been hearing about his Senate speeches since I was in, like, second grade," Palin quipped to thunderous applause at the Columbus event, where she introduced GOP presidential running mate John McCain.
"This is the same Senator Biden who said the University of Delaware would trounce the Ohio Buckeyes," she said, eliciting boos for Biden.
Posted by osu (anonymous) on September 30, 2008 at 12:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yeah, you're right. Helping communities, as Senator Obama did, is the cause of this! That is so irresponsible and Palin-esque!!
I'm really surprised, pad, that you're not blaming Clinton! Even CONSERVATIVES have put the blame for the bill's failure on JOHN MCCAIN and the Republican House Members who wanted to play politics last week instead of seeking a solution.
Posted by padanorr (David A. Norris) on September 30, 2008 at 12:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Posted by AlisonMiller (anonymous) on September 30, 2008 at 12:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Also, we can't forget those poor unfortunate renters who are being tossed out on their rears (even though they're paid up) b/c of the landlords who can't pay their mortgages either.
I think trying to provide access to a home is a good idea--haven't you guys heard of Maslow?
Greedy people took advantage--that's why we're looking to socialism to fix our problems.
-----------
No doubt this all lead to greed ... There is plenty of guilt to be spread around. I would also say that a home is a basic physical and phychological need, but do we need socialism to provide the homes? Our society has changed the entire paradigm from one of pride in work and accomplishment and bettering yourself to one of entitlements. Being born is not a guarrantee of material things like houses and cars. And it is not just the poor that have this attitude. This attitude invades the middle class and those who we like to call Wallstreet Fat Cats. They want a hand out too ... in the terms of 1 Trillion dollars.
What happened to living with the consequences of your actions? Who is next to ask for a bailout?
Posted by padanorr (David A. Norris) on September 30, 2008 at 1:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
a new word ... Palin-esque ...
Helping communities is one thing ... forcing lenders to offer mortgages to uncreditworthy applicants is another thing. Clinton did have a hand in this. He pressured Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to open up housing loans to unqualified home buyers.
As for playing politics it was the Democrats who were up to their old tricks. The bill failed lacking 12 votes. 12 members of Barny Franks Banking committee voted no.
Pelosis in secret was giving permission to house members where constituents were at risk of loosing their seats in November to vote No.
The Democrats if they really wanted to pass this bill could have easily done so. However the Democrats did not want to pony up the votes because they were going to use the fact that Republicans voted for this bill against them in the election this fall.
The fact is a lot of Democrats are VERY nervous about being re-elected.
Nanci Pelosi might just loose her job.
Where was Obama in all of this? Where was the great community organizer? Where was the great deliverer? Why didn't Obama deliver the needed votes?
Ahhhhhh Obama was too busy listening to Ludiacris on his IPhone and telling his advisers to tell Washington, "Call Me If You Need Me". How is that for leadership?
Posted by padanorr (David A. Norris) on September 30, 2008 at 1:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
HOW DID WE EVER GET IN THIS MESS??
"100 percent financing . . ."
"No down payment . . ."
"No income . . .
"No job . . ."
"No assets . . ."
"No credit scores . . ."
"Low credit scores . . ."
"No SSN required . . ."
"ITIN identification accepted . . ."
"Undocumented income . . . even if you don't report it on your tax returns . . ."
BUT WHY WOULD THEY DO THAT??
7.) Unqualified home owners -- not our fault talk to the Banks
6.) Banks -- not our fault talk to Fannie and Freddie
5.) Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac -- not our fault talk to Bush
4.) President Bush -- not my fault talk to Congress
3.) Congress -- not our fault talk to ACORN
2.) ACORN, La Raza -- not our fault talk to Obama
1.) Barack Obama -- Ah . . .
Posted by padanorr (David A. Norris) on September 30, 2008 at 1:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
More of Obama's shady friends ...
Obama's National Finance Chair/Top Fundraiser/Bundler, Penny Pritzker, cost the American taxpayer $460 million with the bailout of Superior Bank in 2001. After the bailout, the Feds sold Superior's bad loans to EMC, a subsidiary of Bear Stearns. Now with this proposed bailout, the American taxpayer will be buying them again. Penny Pritzker was Chairman of Superior Bank FSB, while her Chicago-based family sat on 50% of the board. Under Penny Pritzker's direction, Superior underwent a nationwide campaign of subprime lending for single family loans, auto loans, mobile homes, multi-family, and commercial properties.
Posted by padanorr (David A. Norris) on September 30, 2008 at 1:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Pearl of Wisdom:
"You know my big desire? The morning after November 5th, I want to see the media so shocked that some of them, not Wall St. people, think about jumping out the windows of skyscrapers. I want to see the Democrats so shocked that the DNC has to be guarded by psychiatrists to make sure the people inside do not go insane and have to be sent to an asylum. I want to see such a landslide."
Rush Limbaugh
Posted by padanorr (David A. Norris) on September 30, 2008 at 2:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Palin will make Biden look like a old fool ...
Gaffe-prone Biden has again raised eyebrows with another story about his exploits in war zones - this time in Afghanistan. Biden said he will grill Republican rival Sarah Palin in Thursday's vice presidential debate about "the superhighway of terror between Pakistan and Afghanistan where my helicopter was forced down."
"If you want to know where Al Qaeda lives, you want to know where Bin Laden is, come back to Afghanistan with me," Biden bragged to the National Guard Association. "Come back to the area where my helicopter was forced down, with a three-star general and three senators at 10,500 feet in the middle of those mountains. I can tell you where they are."
But it turns out that inclement weather, not terrorists, prompted the chopper to land in an open field during Biden's visit to Afghanistan in February. Fighter jets kept watch overhead while a convoy of security vehicles was dispatched to retrieve Biden and fellow Senators Chuck Hagel and John Kerry.
"We were going to send Biden out to fight the Taliban with snowballs, but we didn't have to," joked Kerry, a Democrat, to the AP. "Other than getting a little cold, it was fine."
Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 30, 2008 at 5:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)
My boss told me that he has a Realtor friend out in California and they were discussing the issue. The Realtor friend said that it is California State law that a person does not have to provide proof of income. They have to go by what that person SAYS is his income.
Posted by MasterChef (anonymous) on September 30, 2008 at 7:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
yeah, maybe ol' rush could recommend a good rehab clinic :)
Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on September 30, 2008 at 7:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Hey MasterChef, what did Bill Clinton's brother in law say about the last democratic President??? Something to the effect that "He had a nose like a vacuum cleaner"? I wonder what he meant by that?
Posted by mcaldwell (Mike Caldwell) on September 30, 2008 at 9:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I would like to encourage everyone to take time to update their anonymity profiles. It isn't mandatory but it would certainly give you more credibility.
Here is a link to my blog that explains it.
http://www.irontontribune.com/weblogs/te...
Posted by steel_herd (anonymous) on October 1, 2008 at 12:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Isn't it funny how McSame suspended his campaign until he cleared things up in Washington? Oh, wait... he didn't.
He made things worse. He wasn't going to debate until the bill was passed. He wasn't going to campaign until the bill was passed. No, he lied. No, maybe he just changed his position again? Who knows, whatever the case, he made it even more clear the choice for president. The man with one house. O B A M A
Posted by padanorr (David A. Norris) on October 1, 2008 at 7:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The media is reporting that Gwen Ifil who is going to be the moderator for the VP debate this thursday has an interest in the outcome of this election. Debate moderators should be unbiased individuals who have not publically disclosed political views on the candidates or have a financial stake in the outcome.
Fact - Gwen Ifil is publishing a book in support of Barack Obama. Ifil has a financial stake in the outcome of this election.
http://www.amazon.com/Breakthrough-Polit...
Fact - Gwen Ifil made public negative statements against Sarah Palin following Palin's speech at the Rebublican National Convention.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zafLsAtp...
It is quite obvious that Gwen Ifil cannot remain unbiased as a moderator and should be replaced.
If you are interested in a fair and unbiased moderation of the VP debates you can email the Executive Director of the Debates Commison. Janet Brown - jb@debates.org
-------------
jb@debates.org
Ms. Janet Brown,
In the interest of a fair and impartial debate I am requesting that Gwen Ifil be replaced as moderator of the VP Debates to be held on Thursday October 2, 2008. In light of Gwen Ifil's public support of Barack Obama and her negative public remarks about Sarah Palin, it is quite obvious that the moderator has built in prejudices against the Republican VP Candidate. Also Ifil has a financial stake in the outcome of this election and that fact should disqualify Gwen Ifil from participating as moderator.
Regards,
David A. Norris
Posted by steel_herd (anonymous) on October 1, 2008 at 8:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Who does like Palin? No one I know. Fact is, no one at heart is unbiased and I don't think the moderator's opinion will affect the outcome of the election. The choice is to the American people. However, I can understand your worries, I would be worried as well if I were in support of the republican party.
Post a comment (Terms of Use Policy)
(Requires free registration.)