Add the money Freddie Mac sent to McCain advisors and subtrack the money from Freddie and FannieMac set to Obama advisors and send me the difference.
Add the money Freddie Mac sent to McCain advisors and subtrack the money from Freddie and FannieMac set to Obama advisors and send me the difference.
You can't blame McCain his truthiness. The fact that he knows his aides don't take bribes from politically corupt corporations comes from his gut. And isn't that where all great Presidents get their truth? His transformation into the next Republican President is almost finished. He just needs buy a ranch.
I believe he has one in Sedona, AZ so the transformation is complete.
Look at donations below from Fannie and Freddie. Obama is second in contributions to Senators from 1989 to 2008. Obama has only been in the Senate since 2005.
Why did Obama vote against McCain's attempt to re-regulate Fannie and Freddie in 2005?
All Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Campaign Contributions, 1989-2008
Dodd, Christopher J S CT D $165,400
Obama, Barack S IL D $126,349
Kerry, John S MA D $111,000
First of all. Obama DID NOT vote against S.190 in 2006. That bill is a confusing mishmash of regulation verbage that essentially would eliminate four banking regulatory agencies and replace them with four new agencies to oversee the mortgage aftermarket. The whole process would be overseen by a board composed of the Secretaries of State and HUD, the chairman of the SEC and the director of a new agency. It was introduced by Sen. Hagel early first session of the 109th Congress and McCain joined as a co-sponsor late in the second session. There were no hearings on this bill. No discussions. No votes. No companion legislation in the House. In other words, the bill was most likely introduced as a favor to a lobbyist and then it was pigeonholed by the Banking committee (controled by Republican Senator Shelby -- remember GOP controled the Senate in 2005-06). It was never intended to go anywhere. It was never scheduled for any votes -- hence, Obama could not have voted against it.
Secondly, the figures on campaign controbutions from FannieMaw and Freddiemac EMPLOYEES are widely publicizes. These are the underwriters, secretaries, administrative assistants, data entry clerks, middle managers, janitors and others who donated in small amounts. And, yes, Obama did receive about $112,000 from this group --- which less than a drop in the bucket holding the billions he has raised -- not a very influentialcontribution, in other words.
What hasn't been widely reported (although I know CNN has made this point) is that John McCain received $169,000 from OFFICERS, DIRECTORS and LOBBYISTs for Freddie and Fannie during the 2008 campaign cycle. From this same group, Obama received only $16,000.
So, as with contributions in general, Obama is favored by the working people at Freddie and Fannie -- but McCain is supported overwhelmingly by the top executives and lobbyists for these institututions.
These facts change the picture somewhat, don't they?
Please remember the gigantic majority of support Obama has gotten has been from the cats who were running the federal mortgage industry back when it was much, much cleaner -- before it was taken over by the conservative stooges who got us into this mess.
Just because an Obama advisor once worked for fed mortgage doesn't mean he's complicit in their recent dealings.
This didn't happen overnight. Fannie and Freddie's expansion into subprime actually started in the 1990's under Clinton's affordable housing policies. The accounting fraud was also committed in the 1990's and early 2000's under Jim Johnson and Franklin Raines. Three years ago, a new team of accountants was brought in to try and clean up the mess. Read the OFHEO report.
McCain is such a hypocrite!!!
He has ads attacking Obama on this very issue, but it's not even CLOSE to having the very firm your Campaign Manager owns, receiving $15,000 per month, for "doing nothing"
You're right...having Jim Johnson on your campaign team, the former CEO of Fannie Mae who was paid millions to run the company into the ground is no where near as bad as McCain's campaign advisor's former firm getting paid a retainer to fulfill a previously agreed to contract after he stopped working there.
Johnson stopped working there a decade ago. You said it yourself above.
Our problems with mortgages are more recent than that.
Read the OFHEO report. The accounting fraud was committed in the 1990s and early part of this decade. The policies that led us into this mess go way back.
I hope none of you numbskulls vote for McCain. If you do, I just want to say thanks for voting for a man who consistenly voted against veterans. I've grown up watching my father wither away from Agent Orange with little or no help from the VA. McCain and his fellow Republicans voted against veterans and help they desprately need. The only one who ever voted to help men like my father was Bill Clinton. Every election, Republicans whisper sweet nothings in everyones ears. When the elections over, they disappear to their base. Rally the base, screw everyone else. BS.
Republicans support veterans out of convenience, with shallow words and lapel-pin bravado. If republicans had half a heart and a tiny fraction of the "patriotism" they espouse, vets like your dad and all of those at Walter Reed would have been properly cared for from day one.
Hypocrisy!
Please send this to your friends and family!
RFK, Jr.: ???Let me tell you about one other of these scams people should know about. If you???re a newly registered voter - and of course the Democrats have done these gigantic registration drives - 12 million people on registration - if you???re a new voter you MUST include your license or some other state I.D. when you come to vote. What that means is that if you???re a college kid (and college kids now - they???re sending in absentee ballots - they???re not going to the voting place, they do everything online or they do everything remotely - they don???t dream of going to the precinct house voting on election day and waiting in a long line) so if they send in the absentee ballot and they don???t include a color copy of their license their vote is going to be thrown into a trash can. And none of these people know this because you have had to read the law in order to know it. So there is no notification for when you fill out your registration form, so all of those 12 million people that the Democrats have registered: those ballots are going to be just thrown out.
http://www.truthout.org/article/rfk-jr-and-mike-papantonio-is-your-vote-safe
RFK, Jr. wrote a long, detailed account of voter fraud in Ohio in 2004 for Rollling Stone in 2005. Chilling piece. Anyone interested in how the Republicans thwart democracy should look it up.
LIES, LIES, AND MORE LIES, THIS IS ALL THEY(GOP) DO! TRYING TO TELL LIES LONG ENOUGH SO THAT ONLY THE DUMB FOLKS WILL FALL FOR THIS GARBAGE.
NEXT THEY WILL BLAME BARACK OBAMA, OFR MR.DAVIS GETTING CHECK'S FROM FREDDIE MAC. THE GOP IS FULL OF IT!
I am so angry that this is not being discussed on the morning shows. THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS! I am so sick of the double standard given to McCain Palin and all of the lies that they are telling. Thanks for printing this Newsweek, but you need to tell you friends on the cable & network news show to get it together. Covering this up is criminal & I don't appreciate having to live in a country with a hot tempered lying POW with his finger on the trigger because the media wanted a horserace. I am so sick with anger and disgust & my hands are shaking as I write this. It's not right.
CO-Pres: Palin Drags McCain down
by kos
Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 12:14:22 PM PDT
McCain (R) 44 (46)
Obama (D) 51 (47)
A precipitous drop in Sarah Palin???s approval may be helping to fuel Obama???s gains. Immediately after the convention 41% of Colorado voters said that her selection made them more likely to vote for John McCain, compared to 38% who said it made them less likely to do so. Since then there???s been a 12 point drop in her net favorability. Now just 38% say that she makes them more likely to vote for the Republican, with 47% saying they???re less likely to do so.
???Barack Obama has greatly increased his lead with independents since we last polled Colorado,??? said Dean Debnam, President of Public Policy Polling. ???It seems like the more voters have learned about Sarah Palin the less they???ve liked her, and that???s allowed Obama to open up the largest lead he???s shown in a PPP poll of Colorado.???
Those who argued giving Palin a pass when she was wildly popular were wrong. While she's rallied the base and solidified states like North Dakota and Alaska for Palin, she is now toxic to independents and Democrats.
The movement over the last couple weeks has been particularly acute with independent voters. 56% of them say that the Palin choice makes them less likely to support McCain and what was a 49-38 lead for Obama with that group is now a 58-31 advantage.
Voters have "learned [more] about Sarah Palin" because we aggressively investigated her record and encouraged the traditional media to do the same (and they did a pretty darn good job). Giving her a pass because she was "too popular" or because it "took the focus off McCain" would have allowed her positive narrative to stick, allowing her popularity to continue propping up McCain. As I've said before, this is a tactic straight out of Taking on the System.
Instead of being an asset to the McCain effort, they're now forced to hide her, afraid of giving critics more ammunition to use against her (and, by extension, McCain).
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/23/AR2008092300439.html
By Chris Cillizza
washingtonpost.com Staff Writer
Tuesday, September 23, 2008; 7:17 AM
The presidential race between John McCain and Barack Obama in four key battleground states remains remarkably stable despite a month of politically significant developments, with the Illinois senator running ahead of or even with his Republican rival according to polling conducted by Quinnipiac University for washingtonpost.com and the Wall Street Journal.
In Colorado, Obama takes 49 percent to 45 percent for McCain while in Michigan Obama stands at 48 percent as compared to 44 percent for McCain. The contest in Minnesota, once considered a lock for Obama, is also quite close with Obama at 47 percent and McCain 45 percent. Only in Wisconsin does Obama have an edge -- 49 percent to 42 percent -- outside the statistical margin of error for the poll.
Those results are remarkably similar to data from July Quinnipiac polls in each of the four states and suggest that despite the massive media coverage surrounding the two parties' national nominating conventions as well as the vice presidential selections -- especially that of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, which many presumed would alter the campaign's dynamic -- little has changed in the race for the White House.
The upheaval in financial markets has crystallized the importance of the economy in each of the four states where it is, by far, the most important issue for voters. The results are most pronounced in Michigan, whose economy has been badly crippled with the collapse of its manufacturing and auto industries. Nearly six in ten voters in the Wolverine State cited the economy as the most important issue in their vote; the war in Iraq trailed far behind (12 percent) as did energy policy (10 percent). In each of the other three states more than half of voters named the economy as the most critical issue in the election.
The mainstream media have gone over the line and are now straight-out propagandists for the Obama campaign. While they have been liberal and blinkered in their worldview for decades, in 2007-08, for the first time, the major media consciously are covering for one candidate for president and consciously are knifing the other. This is no longer journalism; it is simply propaganda. And as a result, we are less than seven weeks away from possibly electing a president who has not been thoroughly or even halfway honestly presented to the country by our watchdogs -- the press. The image of Obama that the press has presented to the public is not a fair approximation of the real man. The mainstream media ruthlessly and endlessly repeat any McCain gaffes while ignoring Obama gaffes. You have to go to weird little Web sites to see all the stammering and stuttering that Obama needs before getting out a sentence fragment or two. But all you see on the networks is an eventually clear sentence from Obama. You don't see Obama's ludicrous gaffe that Iran is a tiny country and no threat to us. Nor his 57 American states gaffe. Nor his forgetting, if he ever knew, that Russia has a veto in the U.N. Nor his whining and puerile "come on" when he is being challenged. But worse than all the unfair and distorted reporting and image projecting are the shocking gaps in Obama's life that are not reported at all. The major media simply have not reported on Obama's two years at New York's Columbia University, where, among other things, he lived a mere quarter-mile from former terrorist Bill Ayers. Later, they both ended up as neighbors and associates in Chicago. Obama denies more than a passing relationship with Ayers. Should the media be curious? In only two weeks, the media have focused on all the colleges Gov. Palin has attended, her husband's driving habits 20 years ago, and the close criticism of the political opponents Gov. Palin had when she was mayor of Wasilla, Alaska. But in two years, they haven't bothered to see how close Obama was with the terrorist Ayers. Nor have the media paid any serious attention to Obama's rise in Chicago politics. How did honest Obama rise in the famously sordid Chicago political machine with the full support of Boss Daley? Despite the great -- and unflattering -- details on Obama's Chicago years presented in David Freddoso's new book on Obama, the mainstream media continue to ignore both the facts and the book.
Obviously you are in panic mode but I don't blame you...I would too if I were you. You gave yourself up by highlighting remarks from David Freddoso's new book. I doubt that you have actual facts to go on; however, I do have a marvelous idea for you, why don't you write a book like and make it simple for like minded individuals like yourself.
All Politicians have Lobbyist Ties, to some Degree ?
But Hypocritical, John Mccain, tends to Allude to this fact, that He, moreso than anyother candidate, is [Lobbyist Laden] an is [Oversaturated with Lobbyist] from the Top Middle and Bottom of the Lobbyist Order !!!
McCain has Much More Ties to [Big Lobbyist] and his Camp is Full to the Gills with [Lobbyist] moreso than anyother Campaign...Period.
John McCain is officially [Senile]
He's All Over Obama regarding Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae, yet acts as if this will not be Applied to him and his [Lobbyist Campaign Manager]
People can't stand a [Hypocrite] and Clearly Senile, Unpredictable Person, who makes Irrational or Unstable Remarks on just about Any Issue !!
People will accept a man with a Few Lobbyist ties, you can't Escape the political System, its Heavily Saturated with [Lobbyist] Unfortunately for John McCain....
People don't like [Assertions of Uprightness, followed by Hypocrisy & Contradictions]
Thats what McCain is a [Hypocrite]
McCain complained last week, that Obama is getting Money from the [Hollywood Elite] and overlooks the facts, that McCain himself, had a [Hollywood Fundraiser] a Week before Obama !!
He says that Obama is an [Elitist] knowing full well, that he's the [Elitist] with all the 8 Houses, 8 Cars, 500 shoes and [Multimillion Dollars] via his [Beer Baroness Wife] with her 300,000 Dollar RNC Convention Wardrobe.
McCain is a Very Misleading Candidate, Moreso than Obama could ever Imagine...Thats why Obama is leading.
McCain's Reckless Choice of [Sarah Palin] as his VP, shows a Dire, Desperate Needs to Win and Not put his Country 1st, his Ambitious Decisions are Self Motivated and not Country 1st....
Its me 1st and I'll get top Country 1st, if it all goes according to my Ulterior Plan...
Garner the White Female Vote, at all cost....
And it is Costing McCain, Alright, its costing him, in more ways, than he could Imagine.
All McCain's Breaking Even & Small Political Gains, has Shifted back to Obama.
The RNC Hatefest, The Economy is Fundamentally Sound, Remarks [22 Total] last week was not the 1st time McCain made that Statement !!
Fire the [SEC Chairman Cox] was a Dunder Blunder, because the president cannot Fire the SEC Chairman and the SEC Chairman will step down this January anyway, becaause Cox will exit with the man who Appointed him [George W. Bush Jr.] plus Cox had nothing to do with what McCain accused him of, anyway.
John McCain is [Senile] and 2nd a Hypocrite of the Lowest Kind...Period !!!
Slimy people, these politicians. You can't trust anything any of them say. Me, I'll vote for Obama because he's well-educated. We've had enough bad students in the White House! I don't want someone from the lowest 1% of his class to have his finger on the button.
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]
Excellent investigative work. Catching the McCain camp lying about a key issue in this campaign is what journalism is for.
But the effort in the last paragraph to grant equal weight to McCain's countercharges is a
Excellent investigative work.
But the effort to grant equal weight to McCain's countercharges goes awry. Obama has denied that Franklin Raines has been an advisor to his campaign. To equate his acquaintance with Raines with McCain's relationship with his campaign manager is absurd.
...........Not to be off topic but, is that thing on the side of mccains head getting bigger or is it just my imagination???
or maybe mccain is a type of "pinnochio" but instead of his nose growing every time he tells a lie, that thing on the side of his head grows. wow, what a situation!!
Excellent information, good article that is relevant to the election and those behind the scenes of the Republican campaign. But, where is the reporting that Dodd (committee chair of the hearing today with Paulson and Bernanke) and Obama were #1 and #2 when it came to contributions from or employees of Fannie and Freddie?
Receiving Campaign contributions from employees of a company and receiving money from a company for lobbying is really 2 different things.
What this article is talking about is when you run your campaign on the premis of changing Washington of Corruption, removing the old boys network of lobbiest, and at the same time the head of your campaign is receiving lobbying money for future access to the White House.
Most companies these days ask employees to donate to either candidate or party. The Dems in the company give to the Dem Candidate and the Repubs in the company give to the Repub candidate. The company organizes these donations so it can have some leverage in the future. If one candidate gets more then the other, that only means that more people in that company suport that candidate. There is really no relationship to the donations and the company. Plus each of the employees donations are subject to the limitations that we all have when we donate. So the C.E.O can not give 100,000 of his money or the companies money to the candidate.
But the company can pay anything they want to a lobbiest. This is infact where the corruption begins. Someone in a lobbying firm will take a leave of absense to join a campain. This gives them the direct contact to that candidate if they win. They will usually go back and joing that lobbying firm after the election. This is the normal corrupt practice that McCain says he is going to stop.
Playin Possum stole my words. Repiglican.Brilliant. I wish I had thought that one up. Well, once again another lie from McCain. I once thought Palin was the winner of the Liar's Club contest, but it looks like I'll have to take that back. McCain is working overtime to catch up..
Well, what did Obama say about putting lipstick on a pig? McCain, if the shoe fits, wear it.
Why does McCain keep thinking he won't get caught when he lies? Isn't repeating the same action expecting a different outcome a working definition of insanity?
Enter comments if any for reporting abuse
Discuss