• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Desired: More info on Obama /Fanny /Freddie accusations by McCain.

What does "slipped into" mean to you?

Aside from the obvious double-entendre of what Phil Gramm's "clandestine" amendment is doing to each and every one of us that pay taxes.

Doesn't say much for Bill Clinton if he signed this bill without knowing what was in it, does it??
 
3. Phil Gramm authored and championed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act.

You are being outrageously dishonest.

This bill was intorduced in the House by Rep. Thomas Ewing [R-IL] and cosponsered by Rep. Tom Bliley (R-VA) Rep. Larry Combest (R-TX) Rep. John LaFalce (D-NY) Rep. James Leach (R-IA).

In the Senate, it was introduced in the Senate on Dec. 15th, 2000 by Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN) and cosponsored by Sen. Peter Fitzgerald (R-IL) Sen. Phil Gramm (R-TX) Sen. Charles Hagel (R-NE) Sen. Thomas Harkin (D-IA) Sen. Tim Johnson (D-SD).

Looks pretty bipartisan to me, yet you dishonestly portray it as coming from Gramm alone, who "sneaked" it onto another bill.
 
Doesn't say much for Bill Clinton if he signed this bill without knowing what was in it, does it??

That's it. I'm not voting for Bill Clinton Nov. 4.

(Whew! Crisis averted.)
 
You are being outrageously dishonest.

This bill was intorduced in the House by Rep. Thomas Ewing [R-IL] and cosponsered by Rep. Tom Bliley (R-VA) Rep. Larry Combest (R-TX) Rep. John LaFalce (D-NY) Rep. James Leach (R-IA).

In the Senate, it was introduced in the Senate on Dec. 15th, 2000 by Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN) and cosponsored by Sen. Peter Fitzgerald (R-IL) Sen. Phil Gramm (R-TX) Sen. Charles Hagel (R-NE) Sen. Thomas Harkin (D-IA) Sen. Tim Johnson (D-SD).

Looks pretty bipartisan to me, yet you dishonestly portray it as coming from Gramm alone, who "sneaked" it onto another bill.

Tom Ewing is from my home town. He sucked.

So which is it. Bill Clinton is bad for signing it into law, or it was effective policy because it had bipartisan support?
 
I am going to make this as clear and simple as I possibly can. The current crisis is a result of the unregulated Credit Swap Market. Thats been established in previous posts and sourced.

So then the question is, what made the Credit Default Swap market possible and for that matter legal:



Bloomberg.com: Worldwide

Who authored and championed the bill? None other than Phil Gramm, McCain's former Chief Economic Advisor.

So, lets break this down:

1. The current crisis was made possible because of unregulated Credit Default Swaps.

2. Unregulated Credit Default Swaps were made possible by the Commodity Futures Modernization Act.

3. Phil Gramm authored and championed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act.

1) I agree with you that Phil Gramm authored the bill.

2) Bill Clinton signed the bill, and there was also a lot of support from Democrats on the bill. No political party is innocent. There is plenty of blame to go around.

3) However, having established points 1 and 2, Phil Gramm still remains the albatross around McCain's neck, so we are in agreement there.
 
I am going to make this as clear and simple as I possibly can. The current crisis is a result of the unregulated Credit Swap Market. Thats been established in previous posts and sourced.

You can keep repeating this over and over. I am not debating the cause of this crisis. I am debating YOUR argument that Phil Gramm is uniquely and individually responsible for this crisis.

So then the question is, what made the Credit Default Swap market possible and for that matter legal:
Bloomberg.com: Worldwide

Who authored and championed the bill? None other than Phil Gramm, McCain's former Chief Economic Advisor.

It looks like Gill already owned you on your dishonest characterization of Gramm's involvement, so I don't need to address this, I think the only remaining question is...how did you get this so wrong?

Did the web site you cribbed this allegation from simply get it wrong?
Did you know the Gramm didn't author or champion this legislation but decided to argue it anyway?
Was there a good faith effort on your part to verify the facts?

Seriously, how did you get this so wrong? Did you read David Corn's scathing article at Mother Jones blaming Gramm individually for the current economic mess? The same David Corn that was the first to reveal Joseph Wilson's wife was a covert employee at CIA?
 
BTW - maybe Southern Democrat would like to start a new thread to discuss his Phil Gramm business and leave this thread to talking about Obama relying on former Fannie and Freddie CEO for advice - whether it's about housing or selecting a VP.
 
What is it precisely that McCain said that you're looking for confirmation on.

Well, since all i did is listen to a speech this morning and have nothing written or linkable, I am hesitant to say.

The "General Impression" I got was that McCain was suggesting the Economic Crisis is Obama's fault because he is run by fanny / freddie.
But that is sort of like the plane on ebay crap.
They say one thing, and its not factually and technically incorrect.
But the wording, emphasis, and way the speech is layed out gives you a completely different Impression.
Does this make it a lie? Some think it does and some think it doesn't.
Legally these things are not lies at all.
Morally they are.

What I am wanting to know 2 pronged.
Once a link to McCain's speech is available, I'd like to know if it is correct or incorrect on a technical and factual level.
But i also want to know how correct or incorrect it is on a moral level.

First, nothing can be done with the exact wording of the speech.
But the moral part can be determined by simply determining whether or not Obama was part of the shady practices that led to the fall of our economy.

I saw the post with the factcheck link so I checked that out.

VERDICT
Partially true, but misleading. Donations don't come from companies. A list of employee contributions puts Obama second, but a different list including lobbyists and directors shows McCain getting more.


At least on this part of it, McCain was just doing the same old dirty politics.
And that is what I wanted to know.

Still waiting to find conclusive evidence that these Fanny / Freddie guys are part of Obama's staff.
 
The "General Impression" I got was that McCain was suggesting the Economic Crisis is Obama's fault because he is run by fanny / freddie.

McCain certainly was not saying that.

But that is sort of like the plane on ebay crap.

Now wait a second. If you don't know what McCain even said, then why are you drawing such analogies?

They say one thing, and its not factually and technically incorrect.

Palin says she put the plane on eBay. That was absolutely accurate. McCain says that the plane sold on eBay. That was incorrect. I gave McCain the benefit of the doubt, like I do with Obama, and chalked it up as a mistake. I don't automatically assume that someone lied when they made a mistake. Do you?

But the wording, emphasis, and way the speech is layed out gives you a completely different Impression.

You didn't see or hear the speech, but you're going to address how it was laid ut?

Does this make it a lie? Some think it does and some think it doesn't.
Legally these things are not lies at all.
Morally they are.

Morally what? Legally what? I didn't know there was a legal definition of lie. I thought it was called perjury. Same principles involved, i.e., deliberate and intentional deceit.

What I am wanting to know 2 pronged.
Once a link to McCain's speech is available, I'd like to know if it is correct or incorrect on a technical and factual level.
But i also want to know how correct or incorrect it is on a moral level.

Morally what? This makes no sense. I think maybe what you're trying to get at it is if McCain is technically correct whether there is any there there. It's the so what question.

It's a curious ad and speech that McCain made given that he's acknowledged that he's never been seriously interested in economics during his legislative career that he's now hitting Barack on his economic credentials.

First, nothing can be done with the exact wording of the speech.
But the moral part can be determined by simply determining whether or not Obama was part of the shady practices that led to the fall of our economy.

You don't know what McCain said so why bother with the exercise?

I saw the post with the factcheck link so I checked that out.

VERDICT
Partially true, but misleading. Donations don't come from companies. A list of employee contributions puts Obama second, but a different list including lobbyists and directors shows McCain getting more.

McCain wasn't arguing that Obama had a role in the current economic crisis or that Obama benefitted from the Fannie and Freddie failures.

At least on this part of it, McCain was just doing the same old dirty politics.

You don;t know what he said but you're gonna conclude that it's the same old dirty politics?

Well, at least there's no doubting your intellectual dishonesty.

And that is what I wanted to know.

You don't know but you've already drawn your conclusions...

Still waiting to find conclusive evidence that these Fanny / Freddie guys are part of Obama's staff.

One, I already gave it to you.

Two, why are you still waiting? You've already made up your mind? This is the height of intellectual dishonesty.
 
McCain certainly was not saying that.



Now wait a second. If you don't know what McCain even said, then why are you drawing such analogies?



Palin says she put the plane on eBay. That was absolutely accurate. McCain says that the plane sold on eBay. That was incorrect. I gave McCain the benefit of the doubt, like I do with Obama, and chalked it up as a mistake. I don't automatically assume that someone lied when they made a mistake. Do you?



You didn't see or hear the speech, but you're going to address how it was laid ut?



Morally what? Legally what? I didn't know there was a legal definition of lie. I thought it was called perjury. Same principles involved, i.e., deliberate and intentional deceit.



Morally what? This makes no sense. I think maybe what you're trying to get at it is if McCain is technically correct whether there is any there there. It's the so what question.

It's a curious ad and speech that McCain made given that he's acknowledged that he's never been seriously interested in economics during his legislative career that he's now hitting Barack on his economic credentials.



You don't know what McCain said so why bother with the exercise?



McCain wasn't arguing that Obama had a role in the current economic crisis or that Obama benefitted from the Fannie and Freddie failures.



You don;t know what he said but you're gonna conclude that it's the same old dirty politics?

Well, at least there's no doubting your intellectual dishonesty.



You don't know but you've already drawn your conclusions...



One, I already gave it to you.

Two, why are you still waiting? You've already made up your mind? This is the height of intellectual dishonesty.

I don't know what all of this is about other than giving me a headache.

I wanted to evaluate the story on both a technical and a moral level and gave a good example of the difference.
The idea of something being technically part true but morally a lie, apparently goes over your head.
But the difference is essential and critical to how i view the candidate that I will vote for.
For example, if McCain is technically correct and morally wrong, it would have no effect on me at all.
But if he is morally correct, it would affect my feelings about Obama in a negative way.

Your bias does not allow you to evaluate on a moral level, as you demonstrated by your defense of what is now commonly known as a moral lie.
And since neither of us has a copy of the speech we can not yet evaluate it on a technical level.

So why even bother posting?
If you get a link of the speech, then you'd have something to talk about.
You asked what i was looking for. I told you.
And your response was less than helpfull, if not down right disturbing.
 
I've not seen anything from McCain in a very long time that was not a distortion or a lie.
But this sounded pretty convincing.
And after lying and being caught so many times, I really would not expect McCain to lie again this morning.

This morning McCain gave a long speech on MSNBC accusing Obama of being connected to the Fanny Freddie failure.

It would not change my vote. There is far too much wrong with McCain and his visions of a global empire.
But if 100% of the things I heard this morning are true, I would be very disappointed with Obama.
It would change my vote from a vote of inspiration and hope to a vote of only self preservation to prevent global war.

So i am posting here to see if anyone can present solid facts that either support or disprove McCain's claims.

Edit: Since the Speech is just now ending, there is probably no link to it yet.

I just came to the thread and have yet to read anything more than your post. And as I'm sure the connections between either campaign and the two mortgage giants have been mentioned by now I will only say this.

McCain tried in 2006 to introduce reforms to prevent this mortgage mess BEFORE it happened but you-know-who stood in the way.

And now, as we face a potential economic "DISASTER"

FOXNews.com - Bernanke Warns of 'Deep and Extensive Recession' If Feds Don't Take Action - Politics | Republican Party | Democratic Party | Political Spectrum )

we all must face the truth of the matter...

Obama wants to hike taxes during a weak economy.

:shock:

Massive new taxes and the abandonment of global economic freedom sold as "patriotism" is not only an outrage; it's a huge danger to an economy that has enough troubles already.

IBDeditorials.com: Editorials, Political Cartoons, and Polls from Investor's Business Daily -- Obama Dusts Off Hoover Playbook

Anyone who favors this is insane.
 
Last edited:
1) I agree with you that Phil Gramm authored the bill.

2) Bill Clinton signed the bill, and there was also a lot of support from Democrats on the bill. No political party is innocent. There is plenty of blame to go around.

3) However, having established points 1 and 2, Phil Gramm still remains the albatross around McCain's neck, so we are in agreement there.

Did John McCain try to prevent this from happening in 2006 or didn't he?

Hot Air Blog Archive McCain’s attempt to fix Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac in 2005; Update: Obama can’t get AIG right
 
Obama wants to hike taxes during a weak economy.


Anyone who favors this is insane.

Thanks for the link, I will check into that one and a few more over time.

On a side note though...
If you followed what happened today with the 1 trillion dollar bailout.
(and btw anytime the government leaves a figure open ended like this the figure is usually larger than forseen)
This bail out will not even be the last one.

We also have the Afganistan war to consider.
And both candidates intend to take this to Pakistan, although in which form is uet to be seen.
One candidate favors taking it to Iran, and I will not even get into the Russian stuff.

At this point, anyone that thinks all of our taxes are not about to increase is insane.
If either Obama or McCain were to say they won't raise taxes at this point, I'd call eithber a liar.

Our National debt has essentially doubled in the last 2 weeks.
And with very big wars yet to come.

Taxes are going up, and times are going to get really tough.
And it will be this way no matter who wins now.
We're in serious trouble.
 

Here's the full bill.
GovTrack: Senate Record: FEDERAL HOUSING ENTERPRISE REGULATORY REFORM... (109-s20060525-16)

That doesn't address the problems or the origins of why the housing crisis began. All that does is pay incentive systems. It doesn't address the securitization, it doesn't address the bad ratings, it doesn't address the low federal interest rates, it doesn't address the new mortgage products, it doesn't address the myriad of problems.

Besides, 2006 was already too late. The subprime had already been in full motion for a year.

Try again.
 
If Franks and Dods (D) did their jobs, there would not have been a pressured free for all to put sub-prime borrowers into homes they could not afford. McCain called for Fannie Mae oversight in 2005. :cool:

McCain - Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 (Democrats blocked reform)

Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005

Bill Summary

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.



S. 190 [109th] - Summary: Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 (GovTrack.us)

What was Obama's vote on the Bill that would've stopped the core issue that almost triggered the 2nd Great Depression?


Oh yeah, he hired two of the CEOs from Fannie Mae as his economic advisers.

:shock:
 
It is important for those who really care about the economy to find out who is at the core of the problem. Barney Frank is on the record for pushing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to approve loans to the "misfortunate", alias sub-prime losers.

Mae and Mac donors have given over $510 thousand in donations to the Obama campaign. Jimmy Johnson is one of two of Obama's top economic advisers.

Johnson created the Fannie Mae Foundation where he served with distinction as its chairman and CEO from 1991 to 1998. In 1999, he became CEO of Fannie Mae.

As of 2006, Johnson is a vice chairman of the private banking firm Perseus LLC, a position he has held since 2001. He is also a member of the American Friends of Bilderberg, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the Trilateral Commission. [/QUOTE]

Jim Johnson, Former Fannie Mae CEO, To Begin VP Search for

Johnson's company just cost the American taxpayer $200 Billion. :roll:
 
"You look at Obama's economic advisers, the guys he has counted on from day one and who have raised him a ton -- and I mean a ton -- of money: Franklin Raines and Jim Johnson, both of them are waist to neck deep in the mortgage debacle."

Both Raines and Johnson have served as CEO of Fannie Mae, with Raines taking over from Johnson. Both are key political and economic advisers to Obama.

"How can Obama go out with a straight face and saw it was Republicans who made this mess, when it is his key advisers who ran the agencies that made the big mess what it is?" says a Democrat House member who supported Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton. "It's his people who are responsible for what may well be the single largest government bailout in history. And every single one of them made millions off the collapse that are lining Obama's campaign coffers. If the McCain campaign lets this one go, they deserve to lose."

The American Spectator

Obama is in bed with the swindlers who are going to turn our children into indentured servants secondary to the debt taxpayers eat, the trillion dollar budget Obama is signed onto from the last Senate test vote, and the combination of tax increases while letting the tax cuts expire in 2010. Obama is going to force us into the Greater Depression. Wise up, America. :cool:
 
The American Spectator

Obama is in bed with the swindlers who are going to turn our children into indentured servants secondary to the debt taxpayers eat, the trillion dollar budget Obama is signed onto from the last Senate test vote, and the combination of tax increases while letting the tax cuts expire in 2010. Obama is going to force us into the Greater Depression. Wise up, America. :cool:

Absolutely!

And we have a rare and unique opportunity to witness the Obama modus operendi in action.

We all know that Raines and Johnson were part of the Obama campaign as an advisers and part of his VP selection committee.

MAY 24, 2008

Power Broker Helps Obama
Search for Running Mate
By T.W. FARNAM

WASHINGTON -- Sen. Barack Obama may want to shake up Washington, but the man organizing his search for a running mate is a well-established power-broker.

James Johnson spent eight years as chief executive of Fannie Mae, building up one of Washington's most-effective lobbying operations. Fannie Mae, along with Freddie Mac, are government-sponsored companies that provide the bulk of funding for U.S. home loans. Many viewed Mr. Johnson as the chief protector of Fannie's federal support, which includes an implied backing of its bonds, a line of credit with the Treasury and an exemption from state and local taxes.

...

Mr. Johnson left Fannie Mae in 1998. An investigation by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, which oversees the company, found it had manipulated earnings that year to make targets that increased executive compensation, including a $1.9 million bonus for Mr. Johnson. Franklin Raines, Mr. Johnson's successor, has denied that the accounting decisions were aimed at increasing compensation.

Power Broker Helps Obama Search for Running Mate [May 24, 2008] [James Johnson, Fannie Mae CEO]


Meanwhile, Democrats were not only politically but intellectually committed to the companies, seeing them as innovative public-private institutions that have been a boon to homeownership. In the current crisis, their biggest backers have been Democrats such as Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher J. Dodd (Conn.) and House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (Mass.). Two members of Mr. Obama's political circle, James A. Johnson and Franklin D. Raines, are former chief executives of Fannie Mae.

Tough Decision Coming - washingtonpost.com

But Obama is now scrubbing both of these guys from any and all public records and denying any involvement with them.

Hell, the impression the Obama campaign is almost giving is that Barack has have never even met these guys.

'Johnson? Franklin? Those are former presidents, right?'

Butthis is the same routine he has used in escaping scrutiny re: Ayers, Wright, Auchi, Rezko and the others.

Only NOW we can see exactly how he does it.

The Wikipedia entry on Franklin Raines has been changed repeatedly the last day or two.

Here's a most excellent post by cnredd, the Admin at Political Wrinkles:

This one's too dumb to believe...

Actually, Obama is counting on the public being too dumb to believe it...:mad

Yesterday, in another thread, I specifically pointed out that Franklin Raines is Obama's economic advisor...

Franklin Raines is the former CEO of Fannie Mae...The same people that gave Obama over $126,000 in donations, ranking him second in Fannie Mae lobbyist money only behind the Banking Committee chairman, Democratic Senator Chris Dodd...

So what happens when a McCain ad points this out?...

The usual...Obama's campaign gets another one of his friends to throw himself under the bus before his Messiah gets hurt by the truth...:rolls

Obama denies Raines ties



If you think THAT'S bad, check this out...

The orignal post on Franklin Raines I wrote yesterday had a link to wikipedia's page on him...

So what happened when this Politico article came out?...

The part where it says Franklin Raines is Obama's economic advisor has MYSTERIOUSLY DISAPPEARED!...:eek

Can't say if it was the campaign itself or just one of Obama's fervent supporters who wants Obama to win so badly they're willing to hide the facts, but, as you can see, somebody doesn't want the public to know the truth about Obama's and Raines' connection, and they were fast and furious today in an attempt to make it happen...:mad

Revision_Raines.gif


Here's the cached version of the article BEFORE the sentence in question suddenly vanished...

Raines_cache.gif


As if a single declaration by Raines and a revision of Raines's bio will save Obama from the public knowing this...:no

Of course, Raines, Obama, and the cult-like followers will never be able to whitewash ALL of the internet like they'd want to...

Fanny, Freddie, and Obama

Obama denies Raines ties - Political Wrinkles

I TOLD you that Obama was a sneaky guy and now you are starting to see it for yourselves.
 
Back
Top Bottom