Obama

[n2tattoos.lol]

Editor's note: Glenn Beck is on CNN Headline News nightly at 7 and 9 ET and also is host of a conservative national radio talk show.

NEW YORK (CNN) -- With a little less than a month before the election, this week started with a re-examination of Barack Obama's association with William Ayers.
Glenn Beck

Voting against Barack Obama or Sarah Palin doesn't make someone a racist or sexist, according to Glenn Beck.

Whether holding a career-launching state Senate campaign event at the home of an unrepentant terrorist should disqualify you from the presidency is up to the people to decide. I tend to see it as a rather low bar to clear if you're going to run the world, but hey, that's just me.

The defense on Ayers from the Obama camp is that they're not friends -- Ayers was "a guy who lives in my neighborhood," as Obama said. This strikes me as a strange argument from the same campaign that ran Spanish-language ads attempting to disparage McCain by highlighting his "Republican friends" like Rush Limbaugh.

Besides the fact that Rush isn't a terrorist and had to be completely taken out of context in the attempt to smear him -- Limbaugh and McCain are best known for their adversarial relationship. Rush has spent the better part of a decade mocking him, most recently on the specific stance that was the focus of the commercial, immigration reform.

If Rush qualifies as McCain's friend, then William Ayers might as well be Barack Obama's fiancé.

But as The Associated Press claimed, even mentioning the association with Ayers, as Sarah Palin did in a speech earlier in the week, signifies a hidden "racial tinge." Is anyone else getting tired of this? Any and every time a question of Obama's history or record is asked, there is always someone to blame it on racism.

Remember, William Ayers is a pasty white guy like me. Shouldn't the fact that Palin is criticizing a white terrorist show that it's not his color -- but his terrorism -- that she's not fond of? Instead, the AP tries to make the case that voters will think Obama is "not like us" since "terrorists are envisioned as dark-skinned radical Muslims." Right, because nothing dredges up visions of radical Muslims with box-cutters like a guy named Bill.

Just ridiculous.

That wasn't enough to convince Democratic Rep. Gregory Meeks, who said, "He's 'not one of us'? That's racial. That's fear. They know they can't win on the issues, so the last resort they have is race and fear." He also added, "They are trying to throw out these codes."

I didn't know about the secret white person code language, but I'm hoping there's a secret handshake too.

Earlier, Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius said essentially the same thing: "I think the notion that, 'By the way, have any of you noticed that Barack Obama is part African-American?' -- that may be a factor. All of the code language, all that doesn't show up in polls and that may be a factor for some people."

Note to all white people -- remember to grab your secret racist decoder ring in each box of Cracker Jacks for Crackers.

The New York Observer found no shortage of New York politicians willing to go on the record with their accusations of racism:

"Racism is alive and well in this country, and McCain and Palin are trying to appeal to that and it's unfortunate." -- Rep. Ed Towns

"They are obviously playing on people's fears and prejudices in a desperate way. While not explicitly relating to race, they are clearly creating the opportunity for those inclined to come to those conclusions." -- State Sen. Bill Perkins

"If you have to remind people that Barack Obama is African-American, you have reached the bottom." -- State Sen. Kevin Parker

"Who exactly is Joe Six-Pack and who are these hockey moms? That's what I'd like to know. ... Is that supposed to be terminology that is of common ground to all Americans? I don't find that. It leaves a lot of people out." -- Rep. Yvette Clarke

It's worth noting that all of this comes from the same state and the same party as Hillary Clinton. If you're of the mindset that all Republicans are racist and therefore deserve these attacks, remember what happened to Hillary and her husband during the primaries. If the "first black president" can be vilified over claims of racism, what person that dares to criticize Obama can escape the same fate?

Charges of racism have even entered the financial meltdown. One recent criticism by conservatives has surrounded the Community Reinvestment Act. This act, passed in 1977 under Jimmy Carter and then strengthened by Bill Clinton, pressured mortgage companies to lend to those with poor credit and lower income. You might think that putting the government's endorsement of the loosening of lending standards under the microscope in the middle of a global financial crisis would be a no-brainer.

Well, not to House Financial Services Committee chair Barney Frank: "The bizarre notion that the Community Reinvestment Act ... somehow is the cause of the whole problem, [conservatives] don't mind that. ... They're aware that the affordable-housing goals of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac [and] the Community Reinvestment Act [aim to help] poor people. And let's be honest, the fact that some poor people are black doesn't hurt either from their standpoint."

I guess when you're on record in July of this year saying "I think this is a case where Fannie and Freddie are fundamentally sound, that they are not in danger of going under," the only thing you can do is play the race card.

I'm not sure if this is the new kind of politics we were promised by Barack Obama, but I don't think it's the change most people have in mind. This random name-calling just winds up hurting legitimate claims of racism, which do exist. But they risk being taken far less seriously, if the constant crying of wolf continues.

The truth is, voting against Barack Obama doesn't make you a racist, just like voting against Sarah Palin doesn't make you a sexist. The vast majority of regular Americans understand that. If politicians could catch up and restrain themselves from trying to exploit our differences for their own gain -- we'd all be better off.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the writer.

[n2tattoos.lol]

Who Caused the Economic Crisis?
October 1, 2008

MoveOn.org blames McCain advisers. He blames Obama and Democrats in Congress. Both are wrong.

Summary
A MoveOn.org Political Action ad plays the partisan blame game with the economic crisis, charging that John McCain’s friend and former economic adviser Phil Gramm “stripped safeguards that would have protected us.” The claim is bogus. Gramm’s legislation had broad bipartisan support and was signed into law by President Clinton. Moreover, the bill had nothing to do with causing the crisis, and economists – not to mention President Clinton – praise it for having softened the crisis.

A McCain-Palin ad, in turn, blames Democrats for the mess. The ad says that the crisis “didn’t have to happen,” because legislation McCain cosponsored would have tightened regulations on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. But, the ad says, Obama "was notably silent" while Democrats killed the bill. That’s oversimplified. Republicans, who controlled the Senate at the time, did not bring the bill forward for a vote. And it’s unclear how much the legislation would have helped, as McCain signed on just two months before the housing bubble popped.

In fact, there’s ample blame to go around. Experts have cited everyone from home buyers to Wall Street, mortgage brokers to Alan Greenspan.

Analysis
As Congress wrestled with a $700 billion rescue for Wall Street's financial crisis, partisans on both sides got busy – pointing fingers. MoveOn.org Political Action on Sept. 25 released a 60-second TV ad called "My Friends’ Mess," blaming Sen. John McCain and Republican allies who supported banking deregulation. The McCain-Palin campaign released its own 30-second TV spot Sept. 30, saying "Obama was notably silent" while Democrats blocked reforms leaving taxpayers "on the hook for billions." Both ads were to run nationally.

And both ads are far wide of the mark.

MoveOn.org Ad:
"My Friends' Mess"

MoveOn.org Ad, "My Friends"

Narrator: We all know the economy is in crisis, but who's responsible?

McCain: My friends. My friends. My friends.

Narrator: John McCain's friend Phil Gramm wrote the bill that deregulated the banking industry, and stripped the safeguards that would have protected us.

McCain asked Gramm to help write his economic plan.

John McCain's friend Rick Davis lobbied for Fannie and Freddie for years, "defending" them against stricter regulation. And now? He runs McCain's presidential campaign.

And John McCain himself? He's stood by "deregulation" time and time again.

McCain: I think the deregulation was probably helpful to the growth of our economy.

Narrator: And now that the markets are in meltdown? John McCain's friend George Bush wants hardworking Americans to write the biggest blank check in history, bailing out the Wall Street firms and the Washington lobbyists who got us into this mess. Main Street giving Wall Street $700 billion and getting nothing in return? It's outrageous.

Americans shouldn't have to foot the bill for mistakes that John McCain and his friends made.

Narrator: MoveOn.org Political Action is responsible for the content of this advertisement.

Blame the Republicans!

The MoveOn.org Political Action ad blames a banking deregulation bill sponsored by former Sen. Phil Gramm, a friend and one-time adviser to McCain's campaign. It claims the bill "stripped safeguards that would have protected us."

That claim is bunk. When we contacted MoveOn.org spokesman Trevor Fitzgibbons to ask just what "safeguards" the ad was talking about, he came up with not one single example. The only support offered for the ad's claim is one line in one newspaper article that reported the bill "is now being blamed" for the crisis, without saying who is doing the blaming or on what grounds.

The bill in question is the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which was passed in 1999 and repealed portions of the Glass-Steagall Act, a piece of legislation from the era of the Great Depression that imposed a number of regulations on financial institutions. It's true that Gramm authored the act, but what became law was a widely accepted bipartisan compromise. The measure passed the House 362 - 57, with 155 Democrats voting for the bill. The Senate passed the bill by a vote of 90 - 8. Among the Democrats voting for the bill: Obama's running mate, Joe Biden. The bill was signed into law by President Clinton, a Democrat. If this bill really had "stripped the safeguards that would have protected us," then both parties share the blame, not just "John McCain's friend."

The truth is, however, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act had little if anything to do with the current crisis. In fact, economists on both sides of the political spectrum have suggested that the act has probably made the crisis less severe than it might otherwise have been.

Last year the liberal writer Robert Kuttner, in a piece in The American Prospect, argued that "this old-fashioned panic is a child of deregulation." But even he didn't lay the blame primarily on Gramm-Leach-Bliley. Instead, he described "serial bouts of financial deregulation" going back to the 1970s. And he laid blame on policies of the Federal Reserve Board under Alan Greenspan, saying "the Fed has become the chief enabler of a dangerously speculative economy."

What Gramm-Leach-Bliley did was to allow commercial banks to get into investment banking. Commercial banks are the type that accept deposits and make loans such as mortgages; investment banks accept money for investment into stocks and commodities. In 1998, regulators had allowed Citicorp, a commercial bank, to acquire Traveler's Group, an insurance company that was partly involved in investment banking, to form Citigroup. That was seen as a signal that Glass-Steagall was a dead letter as a practical matter, and Gramm-Leach-Bliley made its repeal formal. But it had little to do with mortgages.

Actually, deregulated banks were not the major culprits in the current debacle. Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo and J.P. Morgan Chase have weathered the financial crisis in reasonably good shape, while Bear Stearns collapsed and Lehman Brothers has entered bankruptcy, to name but two of the investment banks which had remained independent despite the repeal of Glass-Steagall.

Observers as diverse as former Clinton Treasury official and current Berkeley economist Brad DeLong and George Mason University's Tyler Cowen, a libertarian, have praised Gramm-Leach-Bliley has having softened the crisis. The deregulation allowed Bank of America and J.P. Morgan Chase to acquire Merrill Lynch and Bear Stearns. And Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley have now converted themselves into unified banks to better ride out the storm. That idea is also endorsed by former President Clinton himself, who, in an interview with Maria Bartiromo published in the Sept. 24 issue of Business Week, said he had no regrets about signing the repeal of Glass-Steagall:

Bill Clinton (Sept. 24): Indeed, one of the things that has helped stabilize the current situation as much as it has is the purchase of Merrill Lynch by Bank of America, which was much smoother than it would have been if I hadn't signed that bill. ...You know, Phil Gramm and I disagreed on a lot of things, but he can't possibly be wrong about everything. On the Glass-Steagall thing, like I said, if you could demonstrate to me that it was a mistake, I'd be glad to look at the evidence. But I can't blame [the Republicans]. This wasn't something they forced me into.

to be cont.

[n2tattoos.lol]

No, Blame the Democrats!

McCain-Palin 2008 Ad: "Rein"

McCain Ad, "Rein"

Narrator: John McCain fought to rein in Fannie and Freddie.

The Post says: McCain "pushed for stronger regulation"..."while Mr. Obama was notably silent."

But, Democrats blocked the reforms.

Loans soared. Then, the bubble burst. And, taxpayers are on the hook for billions.

Bill Clinton knows who is responsible.

Clinton: I think the responsibility that the Democrats have may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was President to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Narrator: You're right, Mr. President. It didn't have to happen.

McCain: I'm John McCain and I approve this message.

The McCain-Palin campaign fired back with an ad laying blame on Democrats and Obama. Titled "Rein," it highlights McCain's 2006 attempt to "rein in Fannie and Freddie." The ad accurately quotes the Washington Post as saying "Washington failed to rein in" the two government-sponsored entities, the Federal National Mortgage Association ("Fannie Mae") and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation ("Freddie Mac"), both of which ran into trouble by underwriting too many risky home mortgages to buyers who have been unable to repay them. The ad then blames Democrats for blocking McCain's reforms. As evidence, it even offers a snippet of an interview in which former President Clinton agrees that "the responsibility that the Democrats have" might lie in resisting his own efforts to "tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac." We're then told that the crisis "didn't have to happen."

It's true that key Democrats opposed the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, which would have established a single, independent regulatory body with jurisdiction over Fannie and Freddie – a move that the Government Accountability Office had recommended in a 2004 report. Current House Banking Committee chairman Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts opposed legislation to reorganize oversight in 2000 (when Clinton was still president), 2003 and 2004, saying of the 2000 legislation that concern about Fannie and Freddie was "overblown." Just last summer, Senate Banking Committee chairman Chris Dodd called a Bush proposal for an independent agency to regulate the two entities "ill-advised."

But saying that Democrats killed the 2005 bill "while Mr. Obama was notably silent" oversimplifies things considerably. The bill made it out of committee in the Senate but was never brought up for consideration. At that time, Republicans had a majority in the Senate and controlled the agenda. Democrats never got the chance to vote against it or to mount a filibuster to block it.

By the time McCain signed on to the legislation, it was too late to prevent the crisis anyway. McCain added his name on May 25, 2006, when the housing bubble had already nearly peaked. Standard & Poor's Case-Schiller Home Price Index, which measures residential housing prices in 20 metropolitan regions and then constructs a composite index for the entire United States, shows that housing prices began falling in July 2006, barely two months later.

The Real Deal

So who is to blame? There's plenty of blame to go around, and it doesn't fasten only on one party or even mainly on what Washington did or didn't do. As The Economist magazine noted recently, the problem is one of "layered irresponsibility ... with hard-working homeowners and billionaire villains each playing a role." Here's a partial list of those alleged to be at fault:

* The Federal Reserve, which slashed interest rates after the dot-com bubble burst, making credit cheap.

* Home buyers, who took advantage of easy credit to bid up the prices of homes excessively.

* Congress, which continues to support a mortgage tax deduction that gives consumers a tax incentive to buy more expensive houses.

* Real estate agents, most of whom work for the sellers rather than the buyers and who earned higher commissions from selling more expensive homes.

* The Clinton administration, which pushed for less stringent credit and downpayment requirements for working- and middle-class families.

* Mortgage brokers, who offered less-credit-worthy home buyers subprime, adjustable rate loans with low initial payments, but exploding interest rates.

* Former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan, who in 2004, near the peak of the housing bubble, encouraged Americans to take out adjustable rate mortgages.

* Wall Street firms, who paid too little attention to the quality of the risky loans that they bundled into Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS), and issued bonds using those securities as collateral.

* The Bush administration, which failed to provide needed government oversight of the increasingly dicey mortgage-backed securities market.

* An obscure accounting rule called mark-to-market, which can have the paradoxical result of making assets be worth less on paper than they are in reality during times of panic.

* Collective delusion, or a belief on the part of all parties that home prices would keep rising forever, no matter how high or how fast they had already gone up.

The U.S. economy is enormously complicated. Screwing it up takes a great deal of cooperation.

–by Joe Miller and Brooks Jackson

[Randal Graves]

do you really think anyone is going to read these novels you guys are posting? fuck.

[beastley]

shit, i just posted one in response to n2's and then at least i posted a link....n2's gone on a conservative article copy and pasting binge

[ddedig]

All we are doing here is proving the blame game gets you nowhere; but it is fun JUST LIKE MASTURBATING!

[beastley]

damn, ddedig, calm down, give ur dick a rest..the way u e-yell, i can just imagine the skid marks on ur poor weiner

[tlock]

Content, Pictures  and Download links visible to registered users only. 

REGISTER NOW to access all areas that are invisible to non-members.

[Mr Handlebars]

Content, Pictures  and Download links visible to registered users only. 

REGISTER NOW to access all areas that are invisible to non-members.

I want to add something to this. There was a commentary on YouTube that I'm posting about The Howard Stern piece. It misses the point. America is still racist. He blames it on not availing ourselves of resources about the candidates. Most ppl don't want to take the time to educate themselves. Enough said. I let you be the judge for yourselves.

Content, Pictures  and Download links visible to registered users only. 

REGISTER NOW to access all areas that are invisible to non-members.

[beastley]

yeah that makes sense; as an obama supporter, it annoys me when people give black mccain supporters shit. just because you're black doesnt mean you should support obama. just as not all white people vote for mccain.