Freddie’s Friend

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: notroubleatall1963 @ 09/24/2008 3:11:14 PM

    "Since 2006, the federally sponsored mortgage giant Freddie Mac has paid at least $345,000 to the lobbying and consulting firm of John McCain's campaign manager, Rick Davis, according to two sources familiar with the arrangement." And they didn't stop the payments until a month ago - whew! that's really mind-boggling.

    Have you not had enough of corruption, crass and classless politics yet? No? I guess the dumber half of the country is still convinced it needs another good kick in the pants. So it's going to cut off its nose to spite its face and once again vote for another sub-average GOP moron team.

  • Posted By: mrzoid @ 09/24/2008 3:03:21 PM

    Enough whining from all of you! Jesus, can you be anymore onesided? Boohoo, they're attacking McCain, they should be attacking Obama! Boohoo, they're attacking Obama, they should be attacking McCain!

    How about you all admit that both guys are guilty of the same kind of stuff? Im going to let you in on a little secret that a bunch of us in the grey area have known for a while, it's the reason they are both guilty of the same kind of stuff, are you ready? THEY ARE BOTH POLITICIANS!!! If you ae not bright enough to see the flaws in oth candidates, do America a favor, find a gun or a knife or even a belt, and off yourself before Nov. 4; that'd show your real love for America, ridding it of your stupidity.

  • Posted By: AskPlus @ 09/24/2008 2:21:14 PM

    How is it that a witch hunter anointed Ms. Palin (as a God) - on TV - and it was hidden and erased from their archives? Now playing on youtube.
    A witch hunter.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-blumenthal/the-witch-hunter-anoints_b_128805.html

  • Posted By: Jurr @ 09/24/2008 2:09:29 PM

    Most importantly was McCain's reaction to the offending newspaper who broke this story: Anger & Revenge

  • Posted By: AskPlus @ 09/24/2008 2:06:58 PM

    Here's some more news about Ms. Palin's church associates. I apologize, as it turns out, she is a good Christian. I'm positive this will help those who find Mr. Obama's offensive:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-blumenthal/the-witch-hunter-anoints_b_128805.html

  • Posted By: Kara Elizabeth West @ 09/23/2008 10:55:40 PM

    Our current economic crisis might have been averted had Congress passed the 2005 bill introduced by Republicans that would have reformed Fannie and Freddie. But the bill didn???t pass because every Democrat voted against it, including Barack Obama, who received more contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac than any other member of Congress, except Democrat Chris Dodd, who heads the committee that oversees them. Obama even chose Jim Johnson, a former Fannie Mae chairman who helped initiate the relaxed lending standards there, to help him with the vice presidential selection process. When given a chance to demonstrate leadership, Barack Obama failed the test. John McCain, however, spoke out in favor of the bill. I wish we had listened to him then, and I hope we will choose the real leader for president, John McCain.

    • Posted By: schaq @ 09/23/2008 11:00:04 PM

      See McCain's speech advocating the bill below.

      Mr. Isikoff, here is an idea for your next story...why was that bill defeated?

      • Posted By: Mimi13 @ 09/24/2008 1:16:21 AM

        S. 190 wasn't defeated. It was referred to the Senate Banking Committe and it died a peaceful death at the end of the 109th Congress because no one wanted to take any action on it. No votes. No debates. No discussions. No hearings. Nothing. Chair was Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) and Republicans held the majority in the Senate and in the Committe -- so the Dems had nothing to do with it. You know, guys, sometimes senators introduce bills to do a favor for someone and they never have any intention of following through on them. It happens all the time. Look at the percentage of bills that are introduced against the number that even get out of committee. Introducing a bill, often, is just a bit or PR.

        • Posted By: schaq @ 09/24/2008 9:17:49 AM

          If the bill was so meaningless, then I guess Obama should have had no problem being a co-sponsor to the bill while he collected all of those donations from Fannie and Freddie.

          • Posted By: schaq @ 09/24/2008 1:31:44 PM

            The bill prohibited the GSEs from holding portfolios. This is incredibly important, because Fannie and Freddie had originally just guaranteed timely payment of interest and principal, but had evolved into a giant hedge fund subsidized by taxpayers. Bonuses to the executives such as Raines and Johnson were based in part on the size of these portfolios. Also, the legislation would have provided for regulator authority (such as setting capital requirements), similar to a bank regulator. All the Republicans on the Senate Banking Committee supported the bill, and all the Democrats voted against it. Why were the dems so opposed to re-regulating these out of control agencies?


            Plus, there were House hearings in 2003. Here is a great quote. "Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have played a very useful role in helping to make housing more affordable . . . a mission that this Congress has given them in return for some of the arrangements which are of some benefit to them to focus on affordable housing." - Barney Frank.

        • Posted By: schaq @ 09/24/2008 7:07:29 AM

          You are correct. It was not voted on...because it was blocked. But why and by whom?

    • Posted By: Mimi13 @ 09/24/2008 1:11:41 AM

      Sweetie, I doubt that you have any working knowledge of that bill -- S.190. It was sponsoed by three Republican Senators -- Hagel, Sununu and Dole (Liddy) -- in Jan. 2005. McCain signed on 16 months later. It was referred to the Senate Banking Committee Chaired by Sen. Shelby (Rep. -- remember, Republican held the majority for the 2005-06 sessions). There were no hearings. No discussions. No votes. It simplied died at the end of the 109th Congress.Democrats had nothing to do with it. There simply was no support for it. Anyway, if you tried to read the bill (I did) it's not at all clear that it would do anything to tighten regulation on Freddie and Fannie. It was structured to replace another act and it would have created a new entity that would have overseen the mortgage aftermarket in tandem with Treasury, HUD, and the SEC. It would have done away with four federal bureaucracies and created four new ones. McCain made no speeches about this other than the speech on the floor of the Senate the day he signed on as a co-sponsor. I suspect he was merely doing a favor for a colleague (they tend to trade favors). I doubt that he would support anything that is in that bill today. In any case, there was never any effort to push it forward -- there's not even an analysis of it on the record.

  • Posted By: torresc @ 09/24/2008 11:03:37 AM

    Why is it that when something against Obama comes out then they counter with speculations and no facts to prove it.
    Read what Bloomberg states on what created the financial crisis

    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&refer=columnist_hassett&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0#

    • Posted By: ShripathiKamath @ 09/24/2008 1:15:13 PM

      I do not know that they do as you speculate. Why is it that you speculate so?

  • Posted By: DSYMONS @ 09/24/2008 12:55:55 PM

    In watching Michael Isikoff over the years on MSNBC, my respect for him has steadily diminished. He was a guest just this week and I remember thinking "Is this a journalist or a Obama spokesperson?"

    This article removes all doubt.

    I still like to hear Micheal...he's smart, well spoken and very connected...and I like to hear Lanny Davis too. But in my mind, they have the same status. Michael, like Lanny asks himself the question "I know Obama is good and Mccain is bad. I know the facts of the day. What story line do I tell to have the two mesh?"

    This is a valuable service to America...but it is not journalism.

    • Posted By: ShripathiKamath @ 09/24/2008 1:13:44 PM

      Er, DYSMONS, why is it not journalism to report the truth behind McCain's camp? After all, it was McCain who had distanced himself from the disasters that Freddie Mac became.

  • Posted By: peterlnj @ 09/24/2008 9:21:25 AM

    What about the people who are working for Obama who ran these agencies? Why do't you report that? can you people be any more in the tank for him?

    • Posted By: Mimi13 @ 09/24/2008 10:03:40 AM

      There are no people who ran Freddie or Fannie who work for Obama.

      • Posted By: schaq @ 09/24/2008 10:25:09 AM

        Comment: From 1991 to 1998, Jim Johnson served as chairman and chief executive officer of the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), the quasi-public organization that guarantees mortgages for millions of American homeowners. Previously, he was vice chairman of Fannie Mae (1990-1991) and a managing director with Lehman Brothers (1985-1990). An Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) report[1] from September 2004 found that, during Johnson's tenure as CEO, Fannie Mae had improperly deferred $200 million in expenses. This enabled top executives, including Johnson and his successor, Franklin Raines, to receive substantial bonuses in 1998.[2] A 2006 OFHEO report[3] found that Fannie Mae had substantially under-reported Johnson's compensation. Originally reported as $6-7 million, Johnson actually received approximately $21 million.

        On May 22, 2008, Democratic Party officials confidentially divulged that Obama had asked Johnson "to lead the process" for selecting Obama's running mate.[4] On June 4, 2008, Obama announced the formation of a three person committee to vet vice presidential candidates, including Johnson.[5] However, Johnson soon became a source of controversy when it was reported that he had received loans directly from Angelo Mozilo, the CEO of Countrywide Financial, a company implicated in the U.S. subprime mortgage crisis.[6] Although he was not accused of any wrongdoing and was initially defended by Obama on the grounds that he was simply an unpaid volunteer, Johnson announced he would step down from the vice-presidential vetting position on June 11, 2008 in order to avoid being a distraction to Obama's campaign. [7]
        Johnson is a strong Obama supporter who has personally donated the maximum $4,600 to his 2008 Presidential campaign, as well as $1,000 to Obama's Senate campaign in 2004.[8] In addition to personal donations, Johnson is a bundler for the Obama campaign, raising between $200,000 and $500,000.[9]

        • Posted By: Mimi13 @ 09/24/2008 10:52:09 AM

          This is a limited, one-time, voluntary (i.e. nonpaid) assignment for a short-term purpose. McCain's Freddie and Fannie people run the day-to-day operations of McCain's campaign as paid staff. Big difference.

          • Posted By: schaq @ 09/24/2008 1:11:13 PM

            It was short term because it was such an embarrassment.

          • Posted By: sjpersonal @ 09/24/2008 12:11:27 PM

            Thank you mimi,

            Every time McCain get's caught in one of his "MISPEAKS" his supporters come out with "Well Obama did this" which is usually inaccurate! Absolutely NO SENSE OF RESPONSIBILITY!

        • Posted By: djheru @ 09/24/2008 12:09:39 PM

          At least two other people associated with Mr. McCain have ties to either Freddie Mac. The lobbying firm of the Republican that Mr. McCain has enlisted to plan his transition to the White House should he be elected, William Timmons Sr., earned nearly $3 million from Freddie Mac between 2000 and its seizure, federal lobbying records show. Mr. Timmons is founder of Timmons & Co., one of Washington???s best-known lobbying shops. The payments were first reported by Bloomberg News.

          Mark Buse, Mr. McCain???s chief of staff for his Senate office, also is a Freddie Mac alumnus. He and his former lobbying employer, ML Strategies, registered to lobby for the company in July 2003, and received $460,000 before the association ended after 2004.

  • Posted By: befair @ 09/24/2008 12:19:12 PM

    You can be sure that we will see more rediculous stories that relate to nothing or more lies and distortion about Obama, coming from the McCain campaign. Every time they get caught in a story like this, they and their supporters change the subject. This time the media and the country need to hold them accountable and make them face up to it. Most of what McCain says about Obama is flat out false and people are starting to listen and learn.

  • Posted By: olderwiser @ 09/24/2008 11:43:42 AM

    We need to use the republican dictionary more often. As an example, I bet that you didn't know that the word "necessary" in the republican dictionary means "socialism". When Paulson was asked if the act of the government in buying 80% of AIG, the largest company in history, and too large to fail, was socialism, he replied, "(no), it's necessary". This is because the word socialism had been banned from the republican dictionary and their reason was that the only way that they would permit government ownership of a private enterprise in the event that it became, "necessary". See? Words are easy for Republicans. You just make them up as you go along so that you can always be right.

  • Posted By: olderwiser @ 09/24/2008 11:37:42 AM

    You need to give Republicans more time to fix the economy from the mess that Clinton left it in. We have had only eight years to do this. We need more time. Mc Cain will bring us fresh ideas so that we can really do the job right. His running mate will help a lot. She has run a family budget for years and hasn't gone broke yet. Besides, she has a passport now. Also, she has gone traveling. They may even let her shoot a camel.

  • Posted By: olderwiser @ 09/24/2008 11:33:28 AM

    Obama has only one wife. His family values are not nearly as strong as Mc Cain, because he has more wives and more children from more wives than Obama, and therefore knows more about families. This is Rovian logic. We are always better than you, no matter what you do. It is so because we say it is so. You are liberal and we are not. You want socialism but don't have it. We have socialism because we need it to fix the mistakes we made with the nation's money, but we are not socialists because we don't want socialism. See? I told you that we are always right and you are always wrong. Don't dare disagree with us because you will always be wrong, no matter what.

  • Posted By: HyperD @ 09/24/2008 11:15:08 AM

    John McCain: Government of the lobbyists, by the lobbyists, for the lobbyists??? Shame on you! Who is the reformer now? Who is the "real" maverick now? Who is the elitist now? Shame on you???

  • Posted By: HyperD @ 09/24/2008 11:14:07 AM

    John McCain: Government of the lobbyists, by the lobbyists, for the lobbyists. Who is the reformer now? Who is the "real" maverick now? Who is the elitist now? Shame on you???

  • Posted By: mrzoid @ 09/24/2008 10:19:37 AM

    Enough whining from all of you! Jesus, can you be anymore onesided? Boohoo, they're attacking McCain, they should be attacking Obama! Boohoo, they're attacking Obama, they should be attacking McCain!

    How about you all admit that both guys are guilty of the same kind of stuff? Im going to let you in on a little secret that a bunch of us in the grey area have known for a while, it's the reason they are both guilty of the same kind of stuff, are you ready? THEY ARE BOTH POLITICIANS!!! If you ae not bright enough to see the flaws in oth candidates, do America a favor, find a gun or a knife or even a belt, and off yourself before Nov. 4; that'd show your real love for America, ridding it of your stupidity.

    • Posted By: TuffCookie @ 09/24/2008 11:09:36 AM

      lmao i agree with the last sentence!

  • Posted By: olderwiser @ 09/24/2008 11:04:29 AM

    Republicans are good for the country. Democrats are bad for the country. When republicans ruin the economy, they offer to bail the country out. They say, "let the democrats pay taxes on their wages to pay back the bail out". Republicans are right to bail us out. Democrats are wrong not to want to pay for it with their taxes, and they are also wrong to want unnecessary controls and oversight on the money. Republicans know how to spend the money with no oversight and no controls. But, the democrats won't let them. So, it will be the democrats' fault when the country goes into depression. Serves the democrats right.

  • Posted By: TuffCookie @ 09/24/2008 11:03:01 AM

    I can't believe how many people in here are total sheep. You'll believe anything you see in an ad, or hear from their lying mouths. Instead of doing some research for yourselves, and looking up and investigating the FACTS, you'd rather take their word for it to mask your inner racism. If you really gave a damn about this country, you'd investigate the facts on BOTH sides. Republicans especially. Notorious for lying like a string of infected hookers in church. What do you think it says about you when you can boldly support a frickin LIAR? Both sides are guilty of misleading the public but the OUTRIGHT LIES from the McCain camp are just mindblowing. And all you can do is whine and cry "Oh they're not talkin about Obama like this it's not fair". STFU and grow a backbone.

    As a newly registered Democrat, I gave McCain a FAIR chance. I listened to all he had to say then i looked it up, and 90% of it were frickin lies. He lost my vote. He has sold his soul and will do and say anything to win this election. All you people can cry about is something that isn't even true, like how Obama is a muslim. Not true. give it up. You sound so stupid. you have no idea.

    And if I hear about how Palin is "so experienced" one more time, I'm going to scream. Yea she's experienced. Thats why they refuse to let the MSM question her, to see if she really has what it takes. I swear, you people are sheep with no backbone. The GOP could have put a goat on the ticket, and you'd believe he was the best for the country. Idiots.

  • Posted By: olderwiser @ 09/24/2008 10:46:50 AM

    Hold your fire on this. When republicans receive a lot of money from a source, they are not corrupted by such things. They have family values.

    • Posted By: Mimi13 @ 09/24/2008 10:53:12 AM

      yeah -- they take everything of value for their own families.

    • Posted By: olderwiser @ 09/24/2008 10:49:54 AM

      Even so. Having family values means that if you are a republican and you might have slipped just a little bit and taken money that didn't belong to you, you can pray for forgiveness and that is the end of it. Now, you can go ahead and spend the money. Uncle Freddie and Aunt Fannie Mae will help out.

  • Posted By: olderwiser @ 09/24/2008 10:52:49 AM

    Democrats are socialists and republicans are capitalists. Socialists want the government to own all of the businesses. Capitalists want only private citizens and corporations to own all of the businesses. But, if republicans want the government to own 80% of a business too large to fail, that is not socialism. It is only socialism if the democrats want to do it.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse