Tag Archive for 'barack obama'

McCain ready to fight! It’s about time that the Maverick set the record straight on Fannie and Freddie.

It’s being reported everywhere that Senator John McCain is starting to make the valid case of attaching blame of the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac debacles squarely where it belongs. Today in New Mexico McCain clearly stated that he coauthored legislation to reign in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac while the Democrats fought it in effect killing the bill in committee while the rookie Obama remained silent.

I applaud the decision for McCain to press this important issue that speaks to judgment and experience – two things that Senator Obama lacks.

From around the conservative blogosphere, the news is being met with excitement. Here are few examples:

Michelle Malkin:

Don’t go wobbly now, McCain.

Don’t stop.

Take your own advice: Stand up and fight.

Ace of Spades:

The debate is the second-to-last chance to raise these concerns with 50 million Americans at once.

Merely making tough remarks at campaign appearances isn’t going to help.

But perhaps he’s finally heard the alarm bells.


Redstate
:

In a statement obtained by RedState, Sen. John McCain today will lay plain the crisis on Wall Street - not to mention Main Street - firmly on the narrow shoulders of those who caused it in the first place: the Democratic Party in general, and Senator Barack Obama in particular. He’s going to talk about it all. Here’s a taste:

Senator Obama has accused me of opposing regulation to avert this crisis. I guess he believes if a lie is big enough and repeated often enough it will be believed. But the truth is I was the one who called at the time for tighter restrictions on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that could have helped prevent this crisis from happening in the first place.

Senator Obama was silent on the regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and his Democratic allies in Congress opposed every effort to rein them in. As recently as September of last year he said that subprime loans had been, quote, “a good idea.” Well, Senator Obama, that “good idea” has now plunged this country into the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.

To hear him talk now, you’d think he’d always opposed the dangerous practices at these institutions. But there is absolutely nothing in his record to suggest he did. He was surely familiar with the people who were creating this problem. The executives of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have advised him, and he has taken their money for his campaign. He has received more money from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac than any other senator in history, with the exception of the chairman of the committee overseeing them. Did he ever talk to the executives at Fannie and Freddie about these reckless loans? Did he ever discuss with them the stronger oversight I proposed? If Senator Obama is such a champion of financial regulation, why didn’t he support these regulations that could have prevented this crisis in the first place? He won’t tell you, but you deserve an answer.

To our lurkers: that’s John McCain calling your guy a gutless, two-faced coward who lets others do his fighting. Which, by the
way, is perfectly correct.

Ifill must step down as moderator of debate

With her pro-Obama book set to come out on Inaguration Day, PBS journalist Gwen Ifill must recuse herself as the moderator of the VP debate between Governor Sarah Palin and Obama’s running mate since she stands to profit personally from an Obama Presidency.

Furthermore, it is in the opinion of this writer, that Ifill’s decision to accept the position of moderator is shameful and implies that she has put her self interest ahead of an honest debate. The mere appearance of inappropriate motivation is a more than sufficient cause for her removal from the debate.

Understand this would be different if this conflict of interest was diclosed fully to all parties early in the process, but since it was not, I call on the Ifill to make the correct call and step down. And since that may not happen, I call on the debate commission to remove her to at the very least remove the appearance of impropriety.

Here is what other are saying about this:

Michelle Malkin:

But there is nothing “moderate” about where Ifill stands on Barack Obama. She’s so far in the tank for the Democrat presidential candidate, her oxygen delivery line is running out.

In an imaginary world where liberal journalists are held to the same standards as everyone else, Ifill would be required to make a full disclosure at the start of the debate. She would be required to turn to the cameras and tell the national audience that she has a book coming out on January 20, 2009 – a date that just happens to coincide with the inauguration of the next president of the United States.

Little Green Footballs:

Gwen Ifill should step down as moderator of the vice presidential debate

NewsBusters:

In addition to her portrait of Obama, Ifill will also investigate Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, a close friend of Obama’s; Newark Mayor Cory Booker, who Ifill describes as “very charismatic” in the video; and Rep. Artur Davis of Alabama. “They all chose to get into politics for the most upstanding of reasons, and they all have achieved much more than their parents could have hoped.” It doesn’t hurt that it’s made Obama a mega-best-selling multi-millionaire author.

Ifill presents Obama and the others as the idealistic successors of Martin Luther King: “This book is about a generation of people who took seriously the achievements that their parents fought for. They knew that Martin Luther King did what he did so they can do what they’re doing, and they decided to follow through.”

RedState:

Note that neither Ms. Malkin nor I am suggesting that Ms. Ifill stop moderating the debate; merely that she let the viewing public know right from the start that it’s in Ms. Ifill’s long-term financial interest that Senator Obama win the Presidency. They call it “transparency:” it’s quite the coming thing. The media should try it sometime.

Amanda Carpenter:

“I confirmed for us here on GretaWire: the McCain campaign did NOT know about Gwen Ifill’s book,” Fox anchor Greta Van Susteren reported on her blog, GretaWire, a day before the debate is scheduled to occur.

Conservative websites were on fire Wednesday morning after it was discovered moderator Gwen Ifill was planning to release a book about Barack Obama’s impact on race and politics on January 20, 2009.

Obama and ACORN - the Community Organization ties that bind Obama to the radical left

Please read Stanley Kurtz’s excellent piece titled “O’S DANGEROUS PALS - BARACK’S ‘ORGANIZER’ BUDS PUSHED FOR BAD MORTGAGES” in the New York Post.

Pay close attention to ACORN’s tactics and how they helped lead to the current subprime mortgage meltdown.

Go after them Sarah-cuda! William Kristol gives excellent advice to McCain and Palin

I’ll be the first to admit that I’ve often had problems with William Kristol’s brand of conservatism. It is no secret that Kristol was one of the leading founders of the neo-con movement. While I certainly have no problems with preemptive strikes undertaken on solid intelligence that Americans are under imminent threat, I do have a problem with the concept that the American military can largely shoulder the neoconservative mission of spreading democracy to the world.

With that said, Kristol gives the McCain team excellent advice on how Governor Sarah Palin should approach the debate on Thursday here in St. Louis with Senator Joe Biden. In his opinion, Governor Palin should keep the debate focused on the tax and spend liberalism that Senators Barack Obama and Biden share. Put Biden on the defense. Kristol writes in his International Herald Tribune column titled “How McCain wins” the following:

I’m told McCain recently expressed unhappiness with his staff’s handling of Palin. On Sunday he dispatched his top aides Steve Schmidt and Rick Davis to join Palin in Philadelphia. They’re supposed to liberate Palin to go on the offensive as a combative conservative in the vice-presidential debate on Thursday.

That debate is important. McCain took a risk in choosing Palin. If she does poorly, it will reflect badly on his judgment. If she does well, it will be a shot in the arm for his campaign.

In the debate, Palin has to dispatch quickly any queries about herself, and confidently assert that of course she’s qualified to be vice president. She should spend her time making the case for McCain and, more important, the case against Obama. As one shrewd McCain supporter told me, “Every minute she spends not telling the American people something that makes them less well disposed to Obama is a minute wasted.”

The core case against Obama is pretty simple: He’s too liberal. A few months ago I asked one of McCain’s aides what aspect of Obama’s liberalism they thought they could most effectively exploit. He looked at me as if I were a simpleton, and patiently explained that talking about “conservatism” and “liberalism” was so old-fashioned.

Maybe. But the fact is the only Democrats to win the presidency in the past 40 years - Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton - distanced themselves from liberal orthodoxy. Obama is, by contrast, a garden-variety liberal. He also has radical associates in his past.

It sounds like McCain may be listening to the critics of how his campaign is handling Sarah Palin — let’s hope so. Otherwise, we are faced with the unpleasant promise of the executive and legislative branches being controlled by the Dems with the 1st and 4th most liberal Senators at the helm.

And did Obama as Kristol suggest give Palin and McCain the opening to reintroduce the lovely Jeremiah “Hillary ain’t never been called a n______” Wright into the debate — Let’s hope so:

The most famous of these is the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, and I wonder if Obama may have inadvertently set the stage for the McCain team to reintroduce him to the American public. On Saturday, Obama criticized McCain for never using in the debate Friday night the words “middle class.” The Obama campaign even released an advertisement trumpeting McCain’s omission.

The McCain campaign might consider responding by calling attention to Chapter 14 of Obama’s eloquent memoir, “Dreams From My Father.” There Obama quotes from the brochure of Wright’s church - a passage entitled, “A Disavowal of the Pursuit of Middleclassness.”

So when Biden goes on about the middle class on Thursday, Palin might ask Biden when Obama flip-flopped on Middleclassness.

Go after them Sarahcuda!

A video that every voter should watch on the subprime mortgage fiasco and its origins

I’m pretty sure that Obama fans won’t like how close this hits to home with their party and their candidate. This is excellent work looking at the governmental interference with the mortgage lending industry that has led to the current crisis. And the facts clearly point to Democratic leadership that set this crisis in motion. This video is right there with the important work of Mark Levin in properly exposing the greed and corruption that is rampant in the Democratic party that lead to the crisis today.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5tZc8oH–o

Obama’s contributions received from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - A comparison

OpenSercrets.org has posted the amount of contributions that members of Congress have received from the two Great Society quasi-governmental mortgage agencies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for the roughly 19 years between 1989 and 2008.

At the top of the list, there are two Democratic Senators, Chris Dodd, a member of the US Senate since 1980, and Barack Obama a first term Senator that has served just three years in the Senate. And of course, Barack Obama is the Democratic nominee for President.

Let’s take a closer look at the numbers for Obama and Dodd. Over 19 years, Dodd received a total of $165,400 from PAC’s and individuals associated with the two agencies. Over the past three years, Obama has received a total of $126,349.

Now if we do a little math and divide each of these totals by 19 years, we find that Dodd received an average of $8705 per year and the rookie Senator Obama received an average of $42,116 per year. So, Obama has a rate of accepting funds from Fannie May and Freddie Mac that is almost five times greater than Christopher Dodd.

Considering that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac more than any other institution lead to the creation of the sub-prime mortgage fiasco that has lead to so much financial loss, I wouldn’t be surprised if Obama’s detractors take a closer look at this in the form of a political commercial.

And how much has McCain received over the past 19 years? $21,550. That calculates to an average of roughly $1134 per year. So Obama has received almost six times the amount of money than McCain has from the two mortgage giants. And if we look at the rate of contribution, Obama has a rate that is over 37 times the rate of McCain.

Obama and Ayers: A political advertisement

The American Issues Project has released it’s first ad looking at the relationship between Senator Barack Obama, the Democratic nominee for President, and unrepentant American terrorist William Ayers.

Ben Smith at the Politico has looked at this relationship in his article titled “Obama once visited ’60s radicals” where he noted about Ayers:

While Ayers and Dohrn may be thought of in Hyde Park as local activists, they’re better known nationally as two of the most notorious — and unrepentant — figures from the violent fringe of the 1960s anti-war movement.

Smith later writes about an meeting at Ayers’ house between Obama and Ayers and others early in Barack Obama’s political career:

I can remember being one of a small group of people who came to Bill Ayers’ house to learn that Alice Palmer was stepping down from the senate and running for Congress,” said Dr. Quentin Young, a prominent Chicago physician and advocate for single-payer health care, of the informal gathering at the home of Ayers and his wife, Dohrn. “[Palmer] identified [Obama] as her successor.”

Obama and Palmer “were both there,” he said.

Obama’s connections to Ayers and Dorhn have been noted in some fleeting news coverage in the past. But the visit by Obama to their home — part of a campaign courtship — reflects more extensive interaction than has been previously reported.

Here is the advertisement: