What is Digg?47 Comments
- JenniferInMO, on 09/23/2008, -2/+50Here is a link to the letter. Where is John McCain's letter? http://obama.senate.gov/press/070322-obama_urges_b ...
- tjordanchat, on 09/23/2008, -2/+35Very articulate
- algaeturd, on 09/24/2008, -0/+29EVERYONE needs to read this in the wake of all the hearings going on right now.
I'm blown away that anyone would support McCain in this current economic atmosphere. It really does prove that if Americans get their way, they get what they ask for (war, failed economy, lost homes, lost jobs) and ask for more. It's very, very sad in a way to realize how dumb most people are. I used to think America was full of bright, intelligent, educated people. There's so much opportunity in this country, there's no reason for people to stay ignorant on basic issues.
But yet they do. And if you support Obama over McCain, you're instantly made out to worship Obama. That's not it at all. I'm choosing the obvious choice. Obama is smart, educated, articulate, bright, capable of good decisions (based on his record) and McCain is, well, the exact opposite of all that.
And then the truth starts to trickle out about McCain, his gaffes, his flubs, Palin and her incessant failures and missteps. And then you sit back and wonder, 'Do Americans WANT more failure in this country?" They've had almost 8 years of solid failed policies, an economy tanking as the result of a flubbed war, an unconstitutional war...this country is literally falling apart. 49+ MIllion uninsured still in 2008? Are you kidding me?
If I didn't know any better, I would honestly believe that these people are planted and they WANT the country to fail. It's almost too perfect. And you hate to think that people are actually dumb enough to want more of the last 8 years.
Remarkable. Simply remarkable. - trng4tri, on 09/23/2008, -1/+29Excellent letter - to bad no one listened.
- gail40, on 09/23/2008, -1/+28Prescient! He knows exactly what he is talking back.
- retzed, on 09/24/2008, -1/+22"Yeah, well unfortunately I couldn't write a letter because of injuries suffered as a POW." - John McCain
- suntzusputnik, on 09/24/2008, -0/+17god dammit, november 4th can't come soon enough
- GrownupPhan, on 09/24/2008, -0/+17He has mentioned it in several speeches. I know he definitely brought it up in his Colorado appearances early last week. Those soundbites just haven't made it into newscasts. They always focus on the insults back and forth.
- KiminCA, on 09/23/2008, -1/+16There is no such letter. Senator McCain was still seeking less regulations on our financial institutions back in March of 2008, much less March of 2007.
- Icebird, on 09/24/2008, -2/+17Wait, why hasn't Barack talked about this though?
- inactive, on 09/24/2008, -2/+14There's a sucker born every minute and most of them vote republican.
- kismetropolis, on 09/23/2008, -1/+13I don't usually indulge in "metoo"age, but that's really pretty much all that need be said, here, I think.
- Echota, on 01/05/2009, -0/+5Yeah,lol! He might have had a hard time trying to decide which table to use at whiche house to use or which car to use to drive there.
Oh! What difficult decisions McCain has to make compared to us everday working class of people! - marabout40, on 09/24/2008, -0/+4Dugg down for not providing link and for being a mindless minion with your last comment which is a clear attempt by you neocon trolls to continue to smear Obama with that Ayers B.S.
- rexical, on 09/24/2008, -0/+4ya fannie spent money lobbying alrite... but seems that mccain's aide was the one receiving most of it!
- jericho4119, on 09/24/2008, -0/+3Alan Greenspan was the original cause for the housing bubble, with his rate cuts across 2001 and 2002, in his attempt to reinflate the economy after he burst the dotcom bubble by raising rates in 1999.
Had Greenspan not simultaneously signed on to the Bush tax cuts - which would have been DOA with but one elliptical phrase from Greenspan in his testimony before Congress, our country would not have swung from surpluses to deficits and we would not have needed to mask economic growth through financial wizardry, but we could have enjoyed real economic growth, with the traditional accompanying rising wages that would have kept people in their houses. - vstick, on 09/24/2008, -8/+11Remember when McCain asked "where was Obama when I was trying to reign in Freddie and Fannie"? I guess Dems thought the letter was insignificant?? I almost got the feeling that Obama was naive in writing this letter (I am against the bailout and a republican who is going to vote for Obama). Let me explain. After everything that has gone on recently I get a sneaking suspicion that the executives, Bernanake, Paulson and many others in Washington are only in the business for themselves and they don't care what happens or who they hurt or what it will take to fix it they will rescue themselves at the expense of the world. And when I say rescue I mean saving their millions/billions. And everybody who doesn't understand that it is all about them is naive. They probabaly said something like...Who is Obama to tell me what to do? I mean doesn't he know we don't care and it is all about us? Oh yeah, he is not in our inner circle, our ongoing economic raping is supposed to be secret.
- Terisita, on 09/25/2008, -0/+3Unfortunately we cannot get the answers to this question because Senator McCain just cancelled everything, the election debates which will cost Mississippi 5 million dollars-so much for helping the economy Mr. McCain. He also puts his campaign into suspension and this comes from a Maverick, who cannot handle more than one crisis at a time.
It is not as if McCain could do anything anyway but he sounds like he thinks he is Superman here, coming in to save the day. All Republican strategy while the nation is in a crisis that they created. - neognostic, on 09/24/2008, -0/+2This letter outlines how to stop the decline before it reaches the tipping point. We wouldn't be in the position today if his detailed steps outlined in the letter had been utilized. Yes, one of it's points is to find ways to keep houses being foreclosed on, but it is far better to find a way to keep the house with restructured payments, then to now be where we are now, with everybody having to foot the bill.
BTW - Econ 101- mortgages don't lose value, houses lose value.
Secondly - Why should we bail out the banks when there is a bubble? I didn't see the Fed asking for $700 billion when the tech bubble burst. - thepoliticalcat, on 09/24/2008, -0/+2vstick, I'm with IdigObama (whom I don't know from Adam). What you said is pertinent, I have no idea why it was dugg down, so I'm giving you a Digg.
That said, please don't make the mistake of thinking that Obama is naive. I very much doubt it. He wrote that letter when he did because it is a memorandum of the events. As a lawyer and a law professor, he realized that it was important to get on the record with his views on the issue. And he did so well before the first cracks started showing.
He's a decent guy, but he packs quite a punch when pushed. I suspect he's coming to the end of his tether with the McCain't campaign's *****. - Echota, on 01/05/2009, -1/+3I don't know why you are being dugg down,you have a -4!
I'm giving you a digg up because you are probably on to something. - saranac7, on 09/24/2008, -0/+2Right on SpenderH...put them out on the street!!!
then you can give all those "moral" sub-prime lenders perks in a bail out bill.
Something for you to consider, amigo: "there but for the grace of God go I". Ponder it over your $100 bottle of wine this evening. - jericho4119, on 09/24/2008, -0/+2Homes are losing value because the real estate investors can no longer flip their properties to new buyers because the credit markets tightened when the Fed raised rates more than two years ago.
About exactly when real estate in my home state of Florida dried up.
The gradual slow down the Fed was hoping to initiate - the infamous "soft landing" has turned into an escalating snowball on a downhill run and even reversing on rates has helped - especially because inflation is back and the Fed fears lowering rates too fast and too far.
This housing bubble was foreseeable when Alan Greenspan created it after the dotcom crash, in his attempt to restart the economy. This day of reckoning was always in the cards, but no one imagined the fall would be so precipitous.
Attempting to lay the blame for our economic woes on the bottom end of our economic ladder - the poor folks who were forced out of the rental market due to rising prices and all of those marketers who ran commercials with "why rent when you can own" taglines is not merely sad and pathetic, it is truly evil.
I will pray for you. - saranac7, on 09/24/2008, -0/+2ELZA:
Let me help u out here, because you are obviously so full of hatred it obscures your ability to completely and intelligently articulate a position.
You made a fine argument, but when you cap it with a venomous, Archie Bunkeresque, final sentence as you did (and do) you completely undercut any credibility you may have.
You really should work on that. Good luck. - inactive, on 09/24/2008, -1/+2enlighten us.
- inactive, on 10/07/2008, -0/+1This is proof of his leadership and judgment once again....along with his depth of knowledge about the economy. WE NEED TO SEND THIS TO ALL OF OUR FRIENDS AND GET THIS OUT THERE!!!!!!!!!
- NewtC, on 09/24/2008, -1/+2If you read S. 190, the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, you'll see why Dems opposed it.
Don't just repeat Repub talking points, go look at the original bill and you'll find that the reasons Dems opposed it are actually in YOUR best financial interests.
Think, Always. - SpenderH, on 09/24/2008, -0/+1neognostic: Sorry, but you're wrong. Read up on "Marked-to-Market" rules which went into effect last fall. The mortgages have lost value because the house securing the loan has lost value, and that loss has to be shown on the lender's books immediately. Even if a lender is not going to sell the mortgage, he has to adjust its value on his ledger to show what he could sell it for, and that makes his financials looks miserable.
And I'm not advocating for a bailout. If Obama was going to write a letter to prevent this crisis it would have had to say "Stop giving bad loans to families who can't afford them." - SpenderH, on 09/24/2008, -0/+1I assure you I cannot afford a $100 bottle of wine right now. I'm not rich, and I'm not cold-hearted either. But what lead us to this crisis? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Something-something mortgages. Anyone? Sub-Prime mortgages. Mortgages which weren't as good as we'd like on houses which may not hold their value and which don't have much equity. If those had not been given, the housing market would not have had a bubble to burst, the rental market would be great, and we would not be facing a banking crisis. And Obama was asking that lenders make it easier for sub-prime mortgages, which would not have prevented this crisis.
- Terisita, on 09/26/2008, -0/+1Which goes to show you what a mess the Republicans made, no matter how you slice it, its at their doorstep.
Anyone who votes for this party again, has to be crazy. 12 years of Republicans - we will all be working for Mexican wages. - jericho4119, on 09/24/2008, -0/+1Yes - I remember when John McCain asked that question. What I do not remember is McCain telling the public that two of his campaign officials were richly rewarded by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for keeping the regulators off of their trail.
Just how does McCain expect anyone to take him seriously as a regulator, when he has spent his whole career tying himself ever more closely to Ronald Reagan's coattails?
What happened this week is the idea that "government is the problem" - RR favorite saying - died a very public death. I only wish it had happened by the hands of a Democratic President, but in truth, we have Geirge W, Bush for driving the final nail in the coffin of 'ol Dutch.
Goodbye Ron, we hardly knew ye. - nanabbb, on 11/22/2008, -0/+0Sen. John McCain's 2006 demand for regulatory action on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could have prevented current financial crisis, as HUMAN EVENTS learned from the letter shown in full text below.
Guys, we need to be careful of the facts in order to be taken seriously.
McCain's letter DATED A YEAR BEFORE OBAMA'S-- signed by nineteen other senators -- said that it was " ...vitally important that Congress take the necessary steps to ensure that [Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac]...operate in a safe and sound manner.[and]..More importantly, Congress must ensure that the American taxpayer is protected in the event that either...should fail."
Sen. Obama did not sign the letter, nor did any other Democrat. - chiefpayne, on 10/13/2008, -0/+0Ah but McCain DID write a letter concerning this on May 5, 2006. Further he asked for regulatory action to be take and was ridiculed:
McCain's Early Recognition of Fannie/Freddie Crisis
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63siCHvuGFg
And NOW the kicker...President Bush warned of this in 2001 AND 2003 and was ignored too:
Democrats Defend Fannie/Freddie from Regulation - 2004 Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YL36nwCSYUM - Gramiee, on 10/07/2008, -0/+0May 25, 2006, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S5217 - FEDERAL HOUSING ENTERPRISE REGULATORY REFORM ACT OF 2005
>>> IS THIS PROOF ENOUGH??? John McCain Warned about Fannie and Freddie; the corruption and the company’s senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal … (Raines, appointed by Bill Clinton, pulled in $90mil, before he had to step down.) http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cg ...
McCain co-sponsored a bill with Senators Hagel (sponsor), Dole and Sununu… http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s109 ...
>>> Every effort to bring control over Fannie and Freddie was shot down by the Dems and the reason this country is in the mess we’re in..
What proof do we have that Paulson ever received that letter? That would be the only proof Obama’s letter was authentic. Why didn’t he bring his concerns before the Senate so there would be a Congressional record of it? Why? Because the Dem's half of Congress kept saying it was nothing wrong with Fannie and Freddie, and he’d have to confront his party… God forbid!
Look it up…Google, Youtube… In 2003, Pres Bush and McCain in 2005/6, tried to reign in the out of control lending of bad loans… Every attempt was shot down… I am so damn tired of the hearing “It’s Bush’s failed policies”… >>> EVERYTHING HAS TO GO THROUGH CONGRESS >‘YEA’ OR ‘NAY’ - tapthevein, on 10/09/2008, -0/+0Go check out www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s109-190 to see who REALLY killed this. First: John McCain didn't sign on until after it was effectively "dead" (it had passed out of committee and was waiting to be passed to the House - waiting for months). Second: The person responsible for passing it on was Conference Chair Santorum (a Republican from Pennsylvania who was voted out of office by the largest margin of defeat for an incumbent Senator since 1980), who then appears not to have moved it on. The Congressional Record makes no mention of it after he got it. Which means it was never placed on the agenda for a floor vote. So if McCain wants to blame anyone, blame his own party. Whether or not Democrats or other Republicans would have supported it (and many from both parties were against it) is a whole different issue.
- saranac7, on 09/24/2008, -1/+1And John was saying what exactly? honestly, you know there is a sucker born every minute...those who over-extended blew it but so too were all the fat cats you seem to hold on an equal playing field.
Sorry, I think the Keating 5 set the table and your guys drove this home. - sfgiants27, on 10/11/2008, -0/+0You never have been a republican. No true republican would vote for Obama. Saying you would mean that you were never really a Republican.
- FridayClub, on 10/12/2008, -0/+0Here is McCain's Letter, ObamaBots. I guess you couldn't just google it as easily as I did. Keep Your Change. I don't see how Pelosi, Reid, BIden, Dodd, Frank, Kerry, etc. are any kind of change. Oh yeah, they'll have a 3 year Jr. Senator Obama puppet in their white house. They move their fingers, and Obamas arms flap.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=28973 - SpenderH, on 09/24/2008, -3/+1He hasn't talked about it because this letter has nothing to do with saving the financial market. It is about letting low-income families keep their homes which they cannot afford. That would make the financial market worse, because the problem is that a lot of these families should never have been approved for their mortgages. Their mortgages are losing their value based on fear that they will not be repaid and the dropping home values leave the notes with a high risk for the lender.
- SpenderH, on 09/24/2008, -3/+1Prescient? This has nothing to do with saving the financial market. It is about letting low-income families keep their homes which they cannot afford. That would make the financial market worse, because the problem is that a lot of these families should never have been approved for their mortgages. Their mortgages are losing their value based on fear that they will not be repaid and the dropping home values leave the notes with a high risk for the lender.
- EZLA, on 09/24/2008, -6/+1FEDERAL HOUSING ENTERPRISE REGULATORY REFORM ACT OF 2005 — (Senate - May 25, 2006)
[Page: S5217] GPO's PDF
---Mr. 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.
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.
I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.
Bill Status: Dead Barrack Hussien Obama voted against it, Freddie and Fanny were paying him too much $$ - SpenderH, on 09/24/2008, -7/+2This letter has nothing to do with saving the financial market. It is about letting low-income families keep their homes which they cannot afford. That would make the financial market worse, because the problem is that a lot of these families should never have been approved for their mortgages. Their mortgages are losing their value based on fear that they will not be repaid and the dropping home values leave the notes with a high risk for the lender.
- inactive, on 09/24/2008, -11/+5McCain, 2005....Senate Floor:
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.
Blocked by Dems. Nice letter though...really shows how effective you are, Barack. - EZLA, on 09/24/2008, -8/+1FEDERAL HOUSING ENTERPRISE REGULATORY REFORM ACT OF 2005 — (Senate - May 25, 2006)
[Page: S5217] GPO's PDF
---Mr. 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.
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.
I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.
Blocked by party line Dems including Barrak Obama. Lies come back to haunt Ayers protege' Obama Liar - peterclarke, on 09/24/2008, -7/+1John McCain was not sending letters, but rather introducing Senate bills. See s190 back in 2005, before you vote for any one again.
Both Democrats and Republicans were aware of this mess and this bail out would not be necessary if the Senate had passed S190 back in 2005.
Alan Greenspan told Congress to act in the clearest possible terms. He said. ``We are placing the total financial system of the future at a substantial risk.”
“What happened next was extraordinary. For the first time in history, a serious reform bill was passed by the Senate Banking Committee. The bill gave a regulator power to crack down, and would have required companies to eliminate their investments in risky assets”.
The bill didn't become law as Democrats opposed it on a party-line vote in the committee, signaling that this would be a partisan issue.
That Democrat Senate roadblock in 2005 is unforgivable, as the people lost.
A look back to 2005 and we all will see what’s worth keeping in mind while Democrats point fingers between now and Nov. 4.
Senator John McCain was one of the three cosponsors of S.190, the bill that WOULD HAVE AVERTED THIS MESS. Keep smiling…… - inactive, on 09/24/2008, -14/+2Too bad no one listened? Where were the subpoenas, the indictments, the convictions, the prison sentences so richly deserved. Caspar Milquetoast Obama fits in well with his flimsly Democrat cohorts, would that he had the courage of a Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, Cynthia McKinney, or Dennis Kucinich. Bugger off, Obama.
- darneveryone, on 09/23/2008, -13/+1Add a proper description next time and maybe I'll read it.
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is