Obama gets better rating than McCain, Dems better than Pubs on Credit Crisis

I think people are right to call you out, Ken. Stomping yer feet and holding yer breath aren't good debate tactics.

When your posts have substance, they are addressed.

 

Obama's legislation has always been about more benefits for selected groups - just more social re-engineering - and not more effective management of the business of making loans.

 

You prove it about 20 times a day, buddy.

 

You say McCain's campaign is crumbling! Ha! What crumbled today was a $700 billion attempt at socialism. The market will correct once investors understand that the people's representatives aren't going to just fork over the money so easily. McCain is doing just fine. It's Obama that needs to worry because his allies - like Frank and Pelosi - weren't successful today and that reveals a lot more than any polls. Pelosi showed her true colors again and what a "great" performance it was. Frank - the stanch supporter of the CRA and its products Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - also looks like a fool talking out both sides of mouth.

 

It is foolish to support the ideology that Obama is trying to sell the American people.

 

Let's not forget ole' Dingy Harry. He was shown as absolutely useless. He has to be the worst senate head in history.

 

According to the OP, it would be a much more accurate title to say that "Dems give dems a higher rating than Republicans give Republicans".

The title , while not an outright lie, is deceptive and intellectually dishonest.

 

From the Congressional Record:

FEDERAL HOUSING ENTERPRISE REGULATORY REFORM ACT OF 2005 -- (Senate - May 25, 2006)

[Page: S5217]

---

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.

END

 

Yes it is and you know it.

 

Bub I already proved it.

 

The article itself disproves your intentional fallacy. Post # 2 clears it up.

 

It appears you have learned well from the Bill Clinton book. Because we all know it all depends on what "is" is.

 

Lost. Silliness.