9/17/2008 - The McCain Lie of the Day - Page 2

danarhea · 09-17-08, 09:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harshaw

I read it -- and not just because you posted it; I read it earlier today -- changes nothing about what I wrote above. In fact, it bolsters it, because it makes even clearer he's talking about two different things.

Then I submit that you missed some words, or rather, paragraphs. Did you read it too fast?

McCain was clearly talking about mortgages 10 months ago. McCain was clearly talking about mortgages today. What don't you get?

Harshaw · 09-17-08, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by danarhea

Then I submit that you missed some words, or rather, paragraphs. Did you read it too fast?

McCain was clearly talking about mortgages 10 months ago. McCain was clearly talking about mortgages today. What don't you get?

Uh, he was talking about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac specifically in first quote -- and I've posted to what he meant.

He was talking about the larger subprime mess in the second quote, which is not the same thing.

What's so hard to understand about this? Seriously?

danarhea · 09-17-08, 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harshaw

Uh, he was talking about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac specifically in first quote -- and I've posted to what he meant.

He was talking about the larger subprime mess in the second quote, which is not the same thing.

What's so hard to understand about this? Seriously?

1) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were involved in almost the entirety of bad loans, which makes it exactly the same thing.

2) McCain says 10 months ago that he knew nothing about how the mortgage industry works.

3) McCain also says 10 months ago that it was just a handful of people who thought there was really a mess out there.

So, if (1) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac controlled so much of the subprime mess, if (2) McCain admitted 10 months ago that he knew nothing of how the mortage industry worked, and if (3) McCain really believed that only a handful of people out of many thought there was a problem, then how would McCain have known enough, and certainly more than all but a handful of economists 2 years ago (14 months before the statement he made 10 months ago) to be able to warn Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that there was a problem in the first place, especially considering the fact that he has, on numerous occasions, admitted his ignorance of economics?

McCain is busted - pure and simple.

Harshaw · 09-17-08, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by danarhea

1) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were involved in almost the entirety of bad loans, which makes it exactly the same thing.

2) McCain says 10 months ago that he knew nothing about how the mortgage industry works.

3) McCain also says 10 months ago that it was just a handful of people who thought there was really a mess out there.

So, if (1) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac controlled so much of the subprime mess, if (2) McCain admitted 10 months ago that he knew nothing of how the mortage industry worked, and if (3) McCain really believed that only a handful of people out of many thought there was a problem, then how would McCain have known enough, and certainly more than all but a handful of economists 2 years ago (14 months before the statement he made 10 months ago) to be able to warn Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that there was a problem in the first place, especially considering the fact that he has, on numerous occasions, admitted his ignorance of economics?

McCain is busted - pure and simple.

Considering he DID warn about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac two years ago, and that it's in the Congressional Record, I'm not sure where you have a leg to stand on here. No subsequent comments of his can "prove" he didn't make the warning, because he did.

bhkad · 09-17-08, 10:32 PM

YouTube - Obama Ranks Second In Freddie/Fannie Contributions

In only 4 years in the Senate, Barack Obama has managed to become the 2nd highest recipient of campaign cash from Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae in the years cited, 1989-2008.

Obama raked in $126,349 since 2004.

For point of comparison, the #1 highest recipient, Sen. Christopher Dodd, assumed his present office in 1981 and has received only $165,400 from the two controversial companies.

Are you still believing Obama's song and dance?

He's a sneaky guy.

danarhea · 09-17-08, 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harshaw

Considering he DID warn about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac two years ago, and that it's in the Congressional Record, I'm not sure where you have a leg to stand on here. No subsequent comments of his can "prove" he didn't make the warning, because he did.

Really? Here is the Fannie Mae web site. This information comes straight from the horse's mouth. In April of 2007, Fannie Mae reported that:

Quote:

Fannie Mae has a history of working with lenders to serve families who don't have perfect financial profiles. "Subprime" is, after all, simply the description of a borrower who doesn't have perfect credit. We see it as part of our mission and our charter to make safe mortgages available to people who don't have perfect credit.

OK, now we have established that Fannie Mae engaged in the subprime market. Now this:

Quote:

Today, our exposure remains relatively minimal -- less than 2.5 percent of our book of business can be defined as subprime.

Note - Fannie Mae claims in April of 2007 that subprime was less than 2.5 percent of its business. Nobody sees a problem here yet.

Now note this from the International Herald Tribune, printed July 30, 2007:

Quote:

Fannie Mae, the largest provider of money for U.S. home loans, said it held $47.2 billion of securities backed by subprime mortgages at the end of June. Freddie Mac, the second-largest, held $120.8 billion of such debt as of May 31.

That was the first time the actual extent of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in subprime lending was actually disclosed. Before July 30, 2007, nobody knew.

2 years ago would put the date at September 17, 2006, almost a full year before the actual disclosures. See the problem yet, or do you believe that McCain should change his name to Karnak the Soothsayer? Or maybe McCain lied.

danarhea · 09-17-08, 10:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harshaw

Considering he DID warn about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac two years ago, and that it's in the Congressional Record, I'm not sure where you have a leg to stand on here. No subsequent comments of his can "prove" he didn't make the warning, because he did.

Really? Here is the Fannie Mae web site. This information comes straight from the horse's mouth. In April of 2007, Fannie Mae reported that:

Quote:

Fannie Mae has a history of working with lenders to serve families who don't have perfect financial profiles. "Subprime" is, after all, simply the description of a borrower who doesn't have perfect credit. We see it as part of our mission and our charter to make safe mortgages available to people who don't have perfect credit.

OK, now we have established that Fannie Mae engaged in the subprime market. Now this:

Quote:

Today, our exposure remains relatively minimal -- less than 2.5 percent of our book of business can be defined as subprime.

Note - Fannie Mae claims in April of 2007 that subprime was less than 2.5 percent of its business. Nobody sees a problem here yet.

Now note this from the International Herald Tribune, printed July 30, 2007:

Quote:

Fannie Mae, the largest provider of money for U.S. home loans, said it held $47.2 billion of securities backed by subprime mortgages at the end of June. Freddie Mac, the second-largest, held $120.8 billion of such debt as of May 31.

That was the first time the actual extent of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in subprime lending was actually disclosed. Before July 30, 2007, nobody knew.

2 years ago would put the date at September 17, 2006, almost a full year before the actual disclosures. See the problem yet, or do you believe that McCain should change his name to Karnak the Soothsayer? Or maybe McCain lied.

danarhea · 09-17-08, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harshaw

Considering he DID warn about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac two years ago, and that it's in the Congressional Record, I'm not sure where you have a leg to stand on here. No subsequent comments of his can "prove" he didn't make the warning, because he did.

Really? Here is the Fannie Mae web site. This information comes straight from the horse's mouth. In April of 2007, Fannie Mae reported that:

Quote:

Fannie Mae has a history of working with lenders to serve families who don't have perfect financial profiles. "Subprime" is, after all, simply the description of a borrower who doesn't have perfect credit. We see it as part of our mission and our charter to make safe mortgages available to people who don't have perfect credit.

OK, now we have established that Fannie Mae engaged in the subprime market. Now this:

Quote:

Today, our exposure remains relatively minimal -- less than 2.5 percent of our book of business can be defined as subprime.

Note - Fannie Mae claims in April of 2007 that subprime was less than 2.5 percent of its business. Nobody sees a problem here yet.

Now note this from the International Herald Tribune, printed July 30, 2007:

Quote:

Fannie Mae, the largest provider of money for U.S. home loans, said it held $47.2 billion of securities backed by subprime mortgages at the end of June. Freddie Mac, the second-largest, held $120.8 billion of such debt as of May 31.

That was the first time the actual extent of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in subprime lending was actually disclosed. Before July 30, 2007, nobody knew.

2 years ago would put the date at September 17, 2006, almost a full year before the actual disclosures. See the problem yet, or do you believe that McCain should change his name to Karnak the Soothsayer? Or maybe McCain lied.

independent_thinker2002 · 09-17-08, 10:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhkad

YouTube - Obama Ranks Second In Freddie/Fannie Contributions

In only 4 years in the Senate, Barack Obama has managed to become the 2nd highest recipient of campaign cash from Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae in the years cited, 1989-2008.

Obama raked in $126,349 since 2004.

For point of comparison, the #1 highest recipient, Sen. Christopher Dodd, assumed his present office in 1981 and has received only $165,400 from the two controversial companies.

Are you still believing Obama's song and dance?

He's a sneaky guy.

And McCain, the person this thread is about, has 19 former Fannie/Freddie lobbyists on his campaign. Vote Babar.

danarhea · 09-18-08, 01:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhkad

Who's the liar, danarhea?

Hot Air Blog Archive McCain’s attempt to fix Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac in 2005; Update: Obama can’t get AIG right

And who was the second highest recipient of Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac campaign cash?

Hmmm?

McCain is, and you are. McCain's speech had nothing to do with the subprime crisis, as he says, and as you say he said. This was a matter of overstating earnings so that officers in the company could get bonuses. McCain, and you, of course, take it out of context, and attempt to say that McCain predicted the subprime crisis. Now, officers in the company getting bonuses they did not deserve probably pissed McCain off at the time, and would have pissed me off too, had I found out as he did. I commend McCain for bringing it up, but he is still a liar in that he claims today that he warned about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in the context of sub prime lending, when that was not the case at all. It was earnings overstatements, which is also not a good thing, but is something quite different. As I have already shown, the actual disclosures from Fanny Mae were not even made public until August 30, 2007, so there is no way McCain could have seen this coming more than a year before that.

I guess that makes you out to be the liar.

By the way, here is the entirety of what McCain said, directly from the Congressional record itself:

Quote:

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.