McCain will 'suspend' campaign tomorrow

Page 3 of 4 First 1234 Last

  1. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    its comical to say that on one hand, and have the federal goverment about to spend 700 billion it doesnt have to fix it. i wonder if we shouldnt just let the chips fall
    As with everything, there are some times when reality trumps ideology.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.


  2. Quote Originally Posted by J. Peterman View Post
    You could, but then you probably couldn't get a loan for anything in the next 10 years

    Its tough enough with a score above 700...cna't imagine the interst rate you would pay with a FICO score of 500.
    I know, was just joking. I bought in 2006 right before the market plummeted. Got bought a new town home in a suburb of DC for 400k....which was actually a good deal at the time as most people were paying 440-450k.

    Its depressing that someone is asking for 330k in our neighborhood now and even they're not selling.

    We'd like to move in like a year as we have 2 kids and our house is shrinking, but I just don't see that happening. Oh well, it should go up in value SOMEDAY
    •   
       


  3. Quote Originally Posted by Reaper329 View Post
    people are going to be renting for a while.
    Actually, if this goes through you might see a rush to buy a lot of deflated properties.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  4. I agree, however it will depend upon who does the buying.


    outside of that, losts of rentals will be moving

  5. Quote Originally Posted by Reaper329 View Post
    I agree, however it will depend upon who does the buying.


    outside of that, losts of rentals will be moving
    There's a lot of people renting out houses in my neighborhood....probably because nothing is selling.
    •   
       


  6. Quote Originally Posted by Reaper329 View Post
    I agree, however it will depend upon who does the buying.
    Investors always drive the market. Once the investors start buying, prices rise and the cycle starts again and average Joe follows along.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  7. Quote Originally Posted by Rugger View Post
    You think anyone knows how to right the ship? You think Obama will explicitly spell out a plan to shape things up? Do you think McCain would be able to?? Riiiiight. The brightest minds in the financials sector (smarter than both candidates btw) have no ide what to do.

    If they don't figure out this stupid 'bail out' bill, America could be shoulder deep in **** come election day.

    You act like this will be the only chance the American people EVER get to hear about the candidates' plans. Washington is more important than 1 debate-

    ESPECIALLY ONE THAT WILL BE RESCHEDULED

    They both have planes able to fly them from DC to the debate.

    When the USS Cole was bombed, guess what?
    The debates went forward.

    NOW is the exact time that you want to see the two candidates debate.

    All McCain wants to do is make it all about himself.
    He knows what the polls suggest, and needed something to put the spotlight back on himself. He wants to bring his campaign to capital hill....

  8. Quote Originally Posted by Arrogant View Post
    They both have planes able to fly them from DC to the debate.

    When the USS Cole was bombed, guess what?
    The debates went forward.

    NOW is the exact time that you want to see the two candidates debate.

    All McCain wants to do is make it all about himself.
    He knows what the polls suggest, and needed something to put the spotlight back on himself. He wants to bring his campaign to capital hill....
    I do think both candidates should be on the senate floor helping lead their party to a resolution on this bill.

    However, I see no reason why the debate shouldn't go forward. I think Obama was upset that he spent all this time studying up for the debate and now McCain wanted to no-show due to some pesky market collapse.

  9. Quote Originally Posted by Arrogant View Post
    When the USS Cole was bombed, guess what?
    The debates went forward.
    Not really analogous to this situation. They actually have a job to do in DC this week and their leadership there can be an asset to the American people.

  10. When the USS Cole was bombed, guess what?
    There wasn't pending financial and economic doom that called for immediate action.

  11. Quote Originally Posted by Rugger View Post
    When the USS Cole was bombed, guess what?
    There wasn't pending financial and economic doom that called for immediate action.
    Exactly....if the guy running at the time was a Navy Admiral his duty would have caused him to postpone the debates.

  12. Quote Originally Posted by Rugger View Post
    When the USS Cole was bombed, guess what?
    There wasn't pending financial and economic doom that called for immediate action.

    Immediate action?

    LOL.

    He called David Letterman to cancel his appearance on the show and told him he was RUSHING BACK TO WASHINGTON immediately.

    Then Dave played live feed of McCain getting make-up applied for an interview with Katie Couric.

    A deal was nearly finished, and now McCain just wants to go to capital hill for the photo op.

    Oh, and he also now wants the VP debate postponed as well.
    Maybe Palin needs to meet with the "witch hunter" pastor to be blessed again.

    We're supposed to elect one of these two guys 40 days from now, and this guy can't take a couple of hours to EXPLAIN TO AMERICA how he intends on fixing the mess that his obsessive desire to have less regulation created...

    "Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation."

    — John McCain, September 2008


    Nuff Said.

  13. Quote Originally Posted by Arrogant View Post

    "Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation."

    — John McCain, September 2008


    Nuff Said.
    Factcheck.org


    Out of Context on Health Care
    September 22, 2008
    Obama ad twists McCain's words on health care "deregulation."
    Summary
    An Obama-Biden ad falsely claims McCain says he wants to "do the same to our health care" that "Wall Street deregulation" has done to the banking industry.

    The ad relies on a single phrase from a journal article under McCain's byline, in which he said he would reduce regulation of health insurance "as we have done over the last decade in banking." But the full context reveals that McCain was referring narrowly to his proposal to allow people to purchase health insurance across state lines.
    Analysis
    The Obama-Biden campaign released the ad Sept. 22 and said it will air on national cable TV networks. It claims that McCain said he would "reduce oversight of the health insurance industry ... just 'as we have done over the last decade in banking.' " But the ad takes the comments out of context, failing to explain what exactly McCain meant by the comparison to banking. He was talking specifically about allowing the sale and purchase of health insurance plans across state lines.


    McCain's words come from an article under his byline in the September/October issue of "Contingencies," a journal of the American Academy of Actuaries. Here's what the McCain article actually said, in full context:

    McCain: I would also allow individuals to choose to purchase health insurance across state lines, when they can find more affordable and attractive products elsewhere that they prefer. Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation. Consumer-friendly insurance policies will be more available and affordable when there is greater competition among insurers on a level playing field. You should be able to buy your insurance from any willing provider—the state bureaucracies are no better than national ones. Nationwide insurance markets that ensure broad and vigorous competition will wring out excess costs, overhead, and bloated executive compensation.

    Note that McCain began by speaking of buying insurance "across state lines." His comparison with banking regulation was limited to "opening up the insurance market" to "nationwide" competition to "provide more choices" to consumers.

    McCain has in fact touted this aspect of his health care plan for months. His Web page on health care prominently says:

    McCain health care plan: An important part of his plan is to use competition to improve the quality of health insurance with greater variety to match people's needs, lower prices, and portability. Families should be able to purchase health insurance nationwide, across state lines.

    Obama used this misleading accusation on the campaign trail over the weekend. In Daytona Beach, Florida, on Sept. 20, Obama said: "So let me get this straight – he wants to run health care like they've been running Wall Street."

    The analogy to banking in the article was poorly timed, given recent financial events, though it's likely it was written well before Wall Street's crisis reached its climax last week. McCain senior adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin complained to reporters that Obama misunderstood what McCain meant: "If Barack Obama thinks that today's financial troubles were caused by policies which allowed Americans to use an ATM anywhere in this country, then it is better that he continue to be silent about solutions to the crisis on Wall Street," he said. Holtz-Eakin told the Wall Street Journal that the article was talking about provisions that allowed for banking across state lines, which were approved in 1995 – not "over the last decade," as the article said.

    Obama adviser Jason Furman said that it seemed to him that McCain was referencing 2004 rules that, the Journal reported, "pre-empted state banking regulations and that, [Furman] argues, helped bring on the current financial meltdown." McCain did not cite specific legislation. But it is clear he was comparing such regulations to his proposal to allow the sale of health insurance across state lines.

    We’d also note that this was not "an article praising Wall Street deregulation," as the ad says. Wall Street itself is never mentioned, and the only reference to banking or the financial industry is that one line about regulation over the past decade.

    This ad reminds us of another by the Democratic National Committee that took McCain's comments out of context. That ad charged that McCain wanted to stay in Iraq for 100 years, but his full remarks showed that he was talking about a peaceful presence in the country, much like U.S. troops' presence in Japan or South Korea, two examples McCain used in his remarks. McCain said staying in Iraq for a hundred years "would be fine with me, as long as Americans, as long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed." The DNC left that part of the quote out of the ad.

    An Accurate Quote

    The Obama-Biden ad ends by calling McCain's plan "a prescription for disaster," as those words, credited to the Boston Globe, flash on screen. Unlike the first quote cited in the ad, this one is accurate. It comes from a Sept. 21 Globe editorial that compared McCain's and Obama's health care plan, raising objections to McCain's. Here's the quote in context:

    Globe editorial (Sept. 21): There is no comparable lab test, however, for the radical revision of healthcare that McCain is proposing. For all of his moderate positions on immigration and climate change, on healthcare he has endorsed a right-wing ideologue's vision: destroy employer-based coverage and turn Americans over to the tender mercies of private nongroup insurers in an unregulated environment. It's a prescription for disaster.

    Obama and Biden may share that assessment of McCain's plan, as their ad says. But the ad's main criticism rests on distorting McCain's words rather than evaluating an actual component of his health care proposal.

    – by Lori Robertson and Brooks Jackson
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  14. Quote Originally Posted by Arrogant View Post
    Immediate action?

    LOL.

    He called David Letterman to cancel his appearance on the show and told him he was RUSHING BACK TO WASHINGTON immediately.

    Then Dave played live feed of McCain getting make-up applied for an interview with Katie Couric.

    A deal was nearly finished, and now McCain just wants to go to capital hill for the photo op.

    Oh, and he also now wants the VP debate postponed as well.
    Maybe Palin needs to meet with the "witch hunter" pastor to be blessed again.

    We're supposed to elect one of these two guys 40 days from now, and this guy can't take a couple of hours to EXPLAIN TO AMERICA how he intends on fixing the mess that his obsessive desire to have less regulation created...

    "Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation."

    — John McCain, September 2008


    Nuff Said.
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s109-190

    There's your Fannie regulatory bill from 2005 that McCain helped push forward that was blocked by Obama, Dodd, Kerry, and Clinton.

    You should also look into the Community Reinvestment Act rewrite of 1995 (I get that right JP?). Its what loosened the guidelines for loans to begin with and created the subprime market.

  15. On top of that:

    S. 190 [109th]: Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005

    1/26/2005--Introduced.
    Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 - Amends the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 to establish: (1) in lieu of the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), an independent Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Agency which shall have authority over the Federal Home Loan Bank Finance Corporation, the Federal Home Loan Banks, the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac); and (2) the Federal Housing Enterprise Board.
    Sets forth operating, administrative, and regulatory provisions of the Agency, including provisions respecting: (1) assessment authority; (2) authority to limit nonmission-related assets; (3) minimum and critical capital levels; (4) risk-based capital test; (5) capital classifications and undercapitalized enterprises; (6) enforcement actions and penalties; (7) golden parachutes; and (8) reporting.
    Amends the Federal Home Loan Bank Act to establish the Federal Home Loan Bank Finance Corporation. Transfers the functions of the Office of Finance of the Federal Home Loan Banks to such Corporation.
    Excludes the Federal Home Loan Banks from certain securities reporting requirements.
    Abolishes the Federal Housing Finance Board.




    "Sen. John McCain [R-AZ]: 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.

    The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight's report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae's former chief executive officer, OFHEO's report shows that over half of Mr. Raines' compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac.

    The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator's examination of the company's accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.

    For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac--known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs--and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO's report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO's report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.


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

  16. Quote Originally Posted by J. Peterman View Post
    On top of that:

    S. 190 [109th]: Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005

    1/26/2005--Introduced.
    Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 - Amends the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 to establish: (1) in lieu of the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), an independent Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Agency which shall have authority over the Federal Home Loan Bank Finance Corporation, the Federal Home Loan Banks, the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac); and (2) the Federal Housing Enterprise Board.
    Sets forth operating, administrative, and regulatory provisions of the Agency, including provisions respecting: (1) assessment authority; (2) authority to limit nonmission-related assets; (3) minimum and critical capital levels; (4) risk-based capital test; (5) capital classifications and undercapitalized enterprises; (6) enforcement actions and penalties; (7) golden parachutes; and (8) reporting.
    Amends the Federal Home Loan Bank Act to establish the Federal Home Loan Bank Finance Corporation. Transfers the functions of the Office of Finance of the Federal Home Loan Banks to such Corporation.
    Excludes the Federal Home Loan Banks from certain securities reporting requirements.
    Abolishes the Federal Housing Finance Board.




    "Sen. John McCain [R-AZ]: 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.

    The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight's report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae's former chief executive officer, OFHEO's report shows that over half of Mr. Raines' compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac.

    The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator's examination of the company's accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.

    For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac--known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs--and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO's report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO's report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.
    Quick Info
    S. 190 [109th]: Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005
    Last Action: Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
    Status: Dead

    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"
    Beat you to it!

  17. Quote Originally Posted by RobInKuwait View Post

    You should also look into the Community Reinvestment Act rewrite of 1995 (I get that right JP?). Its what loosened the guidelines for loans to begin with and created the subprime market.

    IT was an amendment to the CRA created by Jimmy Carter.


    Clinton Administration Changes of 1995

    In 1995, as a result of interest from President Bill Clinton's administration, the implementing regulations for the CRA were strengthened by focusing the financial regulators' attention on institutions' performance in helping to meet community credit needs. These revisions[3] with an effective starting date of January 31, 1995 were credited with substantially increasing the number and aggregate amount of loans to small businesses and to low- and moderate-income borrowers for home loans. These changes were very controversial and as a result, the regulators agreed to revisit the rule after it had been fully implemented for seven years. Thus in 2002, the regulators opened up the regulation for review and potential revision.[citation needed]

    The rewrite, as City Journal noted back in 2000, "made getting a satisfactory CRA rating harder." Banks were given strict new numerical quotas and measures for the level of "diversity" in their loan portfolios. Getting a good CRA rating was key for a bank that wanted to expand or merge with another.

    Clinton's HUD secretary, Andrew Cuomo, "made a series of decisions between 1997 and 2001 that gave birth to the country's current crisis," the liberal Village Voice noted. Among those decisions were changes that let Fannie and Freddie get into subprime loan markets in a big way.[1] Other rule changes gave Fannie and Freddie extraordinary leverage, allowing them to hold just 2.5% of capital to back their investments, vs. 10% for banks.

    Part of the increase in home loans was due to increased efficiency and the genesis of lenders, like Countrywide, that do not mitigate loan risk with savings deposits as do traditional banks using the new subprime authorization. This is known as the secondary market for mortgage loans. The revisions allowed the securitization of CRA loans containing subprime mortgages. The first public securitization of CRA loans started in 1997 by Bear Stearns. [4] The number of CRA mortgage loans increased by 39 percent between 1993 and 1998, while other loans increased by only 17 percent. [5] [6]


    George W. Bush Administration Proposed Changes of 2003

    In 2003, the Bush Administration recommended what the NY Times called "the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago." [7] This change was to move governmental supervision of two of the primary agents guaranteeing subprime loans, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under a new agency created within the Department of the Treasury. However, it did not alter the implicit guarantee that Washington will bail the companies out if they run into financial difficulty; that perception enabled them to issue debt at significantly lower rates than their competitors. The changes were generally opposed along Party lines and eventually failed to happen. Representative Barney Frank (D-MA) claimed of the thrifts "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." Representative Mel Watt (D-NC) added "I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing."[8]
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  18. Never enough
    EasyEJL's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by RobInKuwait View Post
    So you're saying I need to stop paying my mortgage.......
    have you looked at the soldiers and sailors act to see how it applies to you?
    Animis Rep
    facebook.com/xAnimis
    animis.org/forum

  19. Quote Originally Posted by J. Peterman View Post
    Factcheck.org


    Out of Context on Health Care
    September 22, 2008
    Obama ad twists McCain's words on health care "deregulation."
    Summary
    An Obama-Biden ad falsely claims McCain says he wants to "do the same to our health care" that "Wall Street deregulation" has done to the banking industry.

    So you're claiming that McCain, and the 25 lobbyists running his campaign DON'T favor deregulation, or are you going to pigeon hole it to this one statement?

    Looking forward to your reply.

  20. Quote Originally Posted by J. Peterman View Post
    I think what is funny is that you actually associate the "public" with about 1000 (oops) votes on an issue that just happened 3 hours ago.
    America’s 2nd Reaction, Having Slept On It — Friday Debate Should Be Held On Friday

    24 hours after John McCain suspended his campaign for president and asked to postpone tomorrow’s (Friday 09/26/08) scheduled presidential debate, SurveyUSA today Thursday 09/25/08 conducted a 2nd nationwide survey, that tracked a number of questions from SurveyUSA’s 1st nationwide survey conducted Wednesday 09/24/08 immediately after McCain’s announcement. Key findings from nationwide 09/25/08 survey of 1,200 adults:

    3 of 4 Americans say the Friday debate should be held on Friday.
    http://www.surveyusa.com/index.php/2...eld-on-friday/

  21. Keep trying. If you yell it out loud enough, it might come true.


    As for the other issues, its ok to admit you have no idea what you are talking about. Its not a crime to be completely and utterly wrong.

    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  22. Quote Originally Posted by Arrogant View Post
    America’s 2nd Reaction, Having Slept On It — Friday Debate Should Be Held On Friday

    24 hours after John McCain suspended his campaign for president and asked to postpone tomorrow’s (Friday 09/26/08) scheduled presidential debate, SurveyUSA today Thursday 09/25/08 conducted a 2nd nationwide survey, that tracked a number of questions from SurveyUSA’s 1st nationwide survey conducted Wednesday 09/24/08 immediately after McCain’s announcement. Key findings from nationwide 09/25/08 survey of 1,200 adults:

    3 of 4 Americans say the Friday debate should be held on Friday.
    SurveyUSA » Blog Archive » America’s 2nd Reaction, Having Slept On It — Friday Debate Should Be Held On Friday
    I don't care what the people think. They don't know ****.

  23. Quote Originally Posted by Rugger View Post
    statistically 1200 isn't a large enough sample size
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  24. Quote Originally Posted by J. Peterman View Post
    Keep trying. If you yell it out loud enough, it might come true.


    As for the other issues, its ok to admit you have no idea what you are talking about. Its not a crime to be completely and utterly wrong.


    Two responses in a row that lack any substance.

    Bravo.

    You could have just said "Yes, I've got the blinders on and I'm only going to talk about that specific comment, because I know that McCain has deep ties to the Keating Five, has Phil Gramm as his top financial adviser, and has been a leading proponent of deregulation...and I find it laughable that he's now claiming to be a regulator."

    Had you said that, I'd at least sympathize with the fact that you're just a little lemming, willing to follow whomever the GOP trots out there.


    McSame, 9/18:


    "Under my reforms, the American people will be protected by comprehensive regulations that will apply the rules and enforce them in full.''

    And in March:

    "I’m always for less regulation...I am fundamentally a deregulator."

    Palin impressively managed to call for more government and less government -- in the same stump speech.

    "Guys and gals, our regulatory system is outdated and needs a complete overhaul...We are going to reform the way Wall Street does business...”

    And later,

    Palin went on to say that “government has got to get out of the way” to allow the private sector to create jobs and that she would “recognize that it's not government to be looked at to solve all the problems.”


    Just think, if McCain got his way and was able to privatize Social Security, things would be even better!!

  25. Quote Originally Posted by J. Peterman View Post
    Keep trying. If you yell it out loud enough, it might come true.


    As for the other issues, its ok to admit you have no idea what you are talking about. Its not a crime to be completely and utterly wrong.

    You'd be in jail!



    *runs, for fear of 'The Ban Stick'.

  26. Quote Originally Posted by Arrogant View Post
    Two responses in a row that lack any substance.

    Bravo.

    You could have just said "Yes, I've got the blinders on and I'm only going to talk about that specific comment, because I know that McCain has deep ties to the Keating Five, has Phil Gramm as his top financial adviser, and has been a leading proponent of deregulation...and I find it laughable that he's now claiming to be a regulator."

    Actually I posted 2 articles that show you have no idea what you are talking about in terms of this financial crisis, and also the 2005 Regulatory Act that he co sponsored favoring regulation of Fannie and Freddie Mac.

    All you do is repeat the same old talking points that are repeated nightly by Keith Olbermann. Come up with something new...dig harder in those left wing blogs...I know there is more there!


    Here..pick a story, any story!

    Daily Kos: State of the Nation




    You're an angry man that hates McCain/Palin so much that you will do or say anything to try to make them look bad..facts be damned.

    Now you're bringing up the Keating FIve? Its just really sad.

    If you need help in understanding any of this I can certainly help you but I suggest popping some Prozac..maybe take a run....open the window and yell outside..yell into a pillow, etc... to release all that emotion you have bottled up


    I think we just found the liberal equivalent of CNorris
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  27. Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier View Post
    You'd be in jail!



    *runs, for fear of 'The Ban Stick'.
    Canadians are wrong simply because they are Canadian


    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.

  28. Quote Originally Posted by J. Peterman View Post
    Actually I posted 2 articles that show you have no idea what you are talking about in terms of this financial crisis, and also the 2005 Regulatory Act that he co sponsored favoring regulation of Fannie and Freddie Mac.

    All you do is repeat the same old talking points that are repeated nightly by Keith Olbermann. Come up with something new...dig harder in those left wing blogs...I know there is more there!


    Here..pick a story, any story!

    Daily Kos: State of the Nation




    You're an angry man that hates McCain/Palin so much that you will do or say anything to try to make them look bad..facts be damned.

    Now you're bringing up the Keating FIve? Its just really sad.

    If you need help in understanding any of this I can certainly help you but I suggest popping some Prozac..maybe take a run....open the window and yell outside..yell into a pillow, etc... to release all that emotion you have bottled up


    I think we just found the liberal equivalent of CNorris
    In the 1995, he backed an unsuccessful effort to create a moratorium on all new government regulation.
    http://www.johnmccain.com/informing/...6205edd8d1.htm

    And in 1996, he was one of only five senators to oppose a comprehensive telecommunications act, saying it did not go far enough in deregulating the industry.

    In 1999, McCain voted for the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which passed in the Senate by a vote of 54-44. The deregulation bill loosened restrictions on the activities of banks, brokerage houses, and insurance companies.
    http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LI...n=1&vote=00105

    That bill allowed AIG to participate in the gold rush of a rapidly expanding global banking and investment market. But the legislation also helped pave the way for companies such as AIG and Lehman Brothers to become behemoths laden with bad loans and investments.

    McCain now condemns the executives at those companies for pursuing the ambitions that the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act made possible, saying that "in an endless quest for easy money, they dreamed up investment schemes that they themselves don't even understand."


    In 2002 he voted for the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which passed the Senate without opposition.


    In 2007, however, McCain stated that he regretted his vote in favor of Sarbanes-Oxley, which strengthened financial reporting requirements for publicly held companies but which has been the subject of complaints from businesses.
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...603732_pf.html



    I do agree with you that the Keating Five is very sad.
    Perhaps this article out of Phoenix in 1989 will enlighten others about it: McCain: The Most Reprehensible of the Keating Five

  29. At least McCain has written a bill

  30. "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"






    Its got to hurt.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. McCain Campaign's Race Baiting HOAX.
    By Arrogant in forum Politics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-25-2008, 01:07 AM
  2. Deconstructing the Hypocrisy of the McCain Campaign
    By BodyWizard in forum Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-11-2008, 07:57 AM
  3. McCain and Palin Campaign poster
    By Jayhawkk in forum Politics
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-30-2008, 01:02 PM
  4. The ONE Campaign
    By fkngchucknorris in forum General Chat
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-26-2005, 06:17 PM
  5. Suspend in distilled?
    By pjsallday in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-11-2004, 09:17 PM
Log in
Log in