Biden Blasts McCain on Need for Second Stimulus, Spares a Thought for Obama

Ok let me get this straight.
Joe Biden “blasts” McCain on a second stimulous package yet BOTH he and Obama want one?!?
Speaking with a forked tounge Joe seems to be working for you and your other forked tounge running mate, Obama. You have your masses right where you want them, lining up to go over the cliff.

You know Biden recently released his medical records and I read that his dentist said he had his foot in his mouth, and his proctologist said he had his head up his a**

Mccain wants to wait it out and see, and make sure of all his Rich Ceos can walk away with Big Golden Parachutes First! In Mccains world The Wealthy come First the Middleclass workers will have to wait!

MAybe McCain realizes that this is a lame duck President and Congress. COuld those checks all be sent out before January 20th? Just a thought cause I know some where under there is McCain 2000. What a shame we lost him.

JENNY ROME GA
Amen to that Joe Biden has a way of putting things strange but at least he knows what hes doing, and your right could you Imagine if something were god for bid happen to Mccain Palin will be President now thats a scary thought for Halloween! hahaha

MARY LOU
Maybe some of that 700 billion dollar bail out money could go for a Stimilus check and not Ceos Golden Parachutes!

Read what media is NOT saying about the financial crisis:
http://www.vaboomer.com/the_portal_to_boomeranger/2008/10/mortgage-crisis-the-history.html

On taxes, I am curious, John McCaion was ferverently opposed to the tax cuts Obama wants to repeal. I mena this was one of his true mavericky moments, now he does not stand by that position, what’s up John? Aren’t you maverick enough?

Great if Obama wins, we will have two drug users in office. I wonder what these two smoke on the trail. Someone should gag Biden.

Yeah the grandparents that he trashed in his book while he praised his deadbeat black Muslim father who impregnated 4 other women for a total of 8 children. Shows where his loyalty lies !!!

oh boy, there he goes again. Joe Biden: noun + verb + economy.Posted by: Obamacrat for McCain
—————
Beats hearing noun + verb + Ayers or
Acorn or lipstock or terrorist or fist bump or plumbers or whatever McCain campaign uses on any given day to not discuss real issues!

sparky, newsmax? LOL

Obama is the new Teflon President. Anything the republicans say does not stick!
President Obama! Get used to it!

Biden is out of words. He does not know what to say.Poor Biden, another volcanic eruption will change the dynamics of the election…Up to now, i cannot get over it, why Obama chose Biden and not Clinton…She would have made a big difference for him. Biden is old, monotonous and uncertain.

Obama is about change – So McCain devided he’s about change
Obama wants to help the middle calss – So McCain decided he’d better start talkingabou the middle class
Obama didn’t need to stop everything to deal with the economic crisis – so McCain “unsuspended” his campaign and learned he could actually do more than one thing at a time
Obama calls for stimulus package – a few days later, so does McCain
OBAMA LEADS, McCAIN FOLLOWS
I’ll take the LEADER!

TWO DRUG USERS IN OFFICE???? I THINK EVERYONE IN THE LAST GENERATION OF AMERICANS HAS EXPERIMENTED WITH SOME KIND OF DRUGS. MCCAIN PROBABLY TAKES A PHARMACY EVERY DAY FOR HIS ALIMENTS.

Up to now, i cannot get over it, why Obama chose Biden and not Clinton…She would have made a big difference for him.
————————
I will bet it’s because Hillary did not want the job. There are way more powerful positions in Washington than VP.
And don’t you think she made Obama agree to some form of position to get her support? I certainly do and think she deserves whatever post she wants.
I’ve supported Obama from day one, but it’s crazy to think she just gave up. She is way to smart and tenacious for that.

Let’s play guess which Socialist said this.
“I really believe, that when you are — reach a certain level of comfort, there’s nothing wrong with paying somewhat more.”
You are correct if you said John McCain.
He gave that as a reason for voting against Bush’s tax cuts to the rich in 2001.
McCain also said this about the Bush tax cut:
“I cannot in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us at the expense of middle class Americans who most need tax relief.”
So now that Obama wants those tax cuts to expire he somehow is redistributing wealth and is branded a Socialist but he is following the same view McCain expressed previously.
So John welcome to the Club.

Oh heck why not, what’s another 300 billion, to bad the money is going to cash strapped states (California) roads and infrastructure, and some tax cuts. That’s okay though, they are gonna pay for it with tax increases, just ask Barney Frank. Hmmmmmm, sounds like someone is talking out of both sides of their mouth….tax cuts, tax increase….yup politics as usual.

Obama will become president hopefully, although a lot of hard work to be done before election day. If he becomes president, he will likely offer Hillary a cabinet position. She mentioned that she was not interested in this and wanted to continue her duties serving New Yorkers in the Senate, but maybe she will change her mind.

The RNC keeps sending me appeals for money. After spending 105G for Palin’s wardrobe, I can see why.

This is how McCain’s plan will solve the financial crisis:
Implement a stimulus package sending every taxpayer a $600 check. Then implement his spending freeze by putting stop payments on these checks. People will deposit the checks and their banks will charge them steep fees for depositing a bad check. Then the banks will be swimming in money and the crisis is solved…
And the people? Ahhh, who cares about them…

Umm, Dee.
Remember: Read the article BEFORE you comment!
Also remember: Socks first, THEN shoes!

Ok let me get this straight.
Joe Biden “blasts” McCain on a second stimulous package yet BOTH he and Obama want one?!?
Speaking with a forked tounge Joe seems to be working for you and your other forked tounge running mate, Obama. You have your masses right where you want them, lining up to go over the cliff.
Posted by: dee | Oct 22, 2008 3:07:31 PM
** Okay dee I’m going to need for you to check facts.. the stimulus McCain was offering was for the banks, not the middle class. McLame is trying to give corps our money again instead of helping the American people.. pretty much consistent w/ the Republican motto “give everything to the top and hopefully it will trickle down to the rest of you lazy people who don’t make a million dollars a year”

Check out this video of Sarah Palin answering a 3rd grader’s question about what the job of the VP is, Scary:
http://liesliesmorelies.blogspot.com/2008/10/sarah-palin-to-third-grader-vice.html

Um…we just had a stimulus check a few months ago. George W. sent it to us. Funny, the economy didn’t magically jump up and get back on track when he did it, so will it work for Obama? And Obama’s the one who always goes on and on about the failed Bush economic policies.
Besides, ‘shoot from the hip’ McCain actually wants to slow down and consider the possible downsides to a course of action, and you call him a dud? Don’t you usually say slow and steady is a sign of good judgement?

I’m sorry, which one will give me the most is the determining factor? another stimulous package? how about another bailout or how about raising taxes on anyone who makes 100,000. How about we need more money for the war, how about….. I geuss it boils down to who is going to make the most empty promises, while the common citzen is left holding the bag of crap they sold us instead

So little difference between Obama and McCain… You all discuss trivialities. Bernanke/Greenspan policies got us into this dilemma! Now they want to continue the same policies in high gear. Obama and McCain fight over 2.5% of taxes and budget. They disagree on where we should put more of the empire’s troops. They disagree on the particulars of the socialist takeover of our republic… should it be National Socialism ala McCain, or Leninism ala Obama??? That’s the only debate taking place here.

The only thing the democrats have to sell to the American people is a package of fear, the economy. Not only did they support Bush and then try to blame McCain, but they haven’t offered any real change. Take a look at other countries to see the kind of proposals Obama is wanting to offer. For a country that is at a record high national deficit, it makes absolutely no sense to expand the government with more spending and lack experience to guide our nation.
Posted by: Mr. Republic | Oct 22, 2008 4:09:34 PM
* No it would make more sense to deregulate the system even more! then maybe the stock market can drop 2000 points instead of a 1000 in a day! We’ll open it up even more because I”m the deregulator and my drug addict wife has money plus I’m about to die so who really cares? — Johnny McLame

both sides make me sick. Your guy is worse than mine???? lets get real.

The first guy that posted is a retard. He thinks that Biden is bitching because McCain and Obama want a package, but hes wrong. Only obama wants it and McCain does not. Thats why Biden is blasting him.
I swear some people are dumb
why is there no news about McCain begging Russia for money its strange right after he called them a terrorist country to hmm..

With Joe Biden Democrates didn’t have to spend $150,000 to dress him up. They are using their donations on their campaign message. I wonder what that says about the Republican message – doesn’t much matter what you say as long as you dress right!

NEW AP POLL HAS OBAMA AND MCCAIN IN A DEAD HEAT, BET ABCNEWS WONT REPORT THIS.

jim you are absolutely right. I dont know if the tail is wagging the dog or vice versa. but all i see on here is “i will follow my guy, no matter what, and bash the other side with the same talking points”

Please hurry with another check. I wasted my money on beer and gambling. Now I don’t have any money for christmas. And I need a new morgage, I didn’t think I would really have to pay what I signed for. Also, a big tax break would be great. And free health care…why work anymore!

The first guy that posted is a retard. He thinks that Biden is bitching because McCain and Obama want a package, but hes wrong. Only obama wants it and McCain does not. Thats why Biden is blasting him.
I swear some people are dumb
why is there no news about McCain begging Russia for money its strange right after he called them a terrorist country to hmm..
Posted by: Militant Atheist | Oct 22, 2008 4:15:57 PM
**He’s war hungry McCain. He wants another war so he can ‘prove’ that he’s a military man! Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Iran…

our politics have become our religion and who we choose to follow is character assasination by the opposing view.

we are spending $465 Billion A YEAR on defense…or should I say on 750 military bases around the world…it is time our troops in Gremany, France, Belgium, (NATO in general), Japan, Australia, New Zealand, and nearly every other “G20″ nation so we can pay off some of the debt from our wars of occupation that have generated little more than derision abroad and growing disrespect for our CONSTITUTION, leading to the slow tyranny of the Bush administration at home.

I’m touched by Palin’s lament over Hillary’s loss to Biden.Is it possible that she’s amateurish enough to think her crocodile tears will fire up Sen. Clinton’s admirers, and thus split the Democratic vote ? Sarah…stay as dumb as you are. Your gaffes make Joe Biden sound like Einstein. By the way, I looove your elite wardrobe. Have you noticed how so many people are worried that McCain might die, and leave you the job? I’m more fearful that YOU might kick the bucket, and leave it to HIM !

I would like to comment on this crazy idea that we as voters of this great nation of ours would allow the smear tactics to come into the picture when it is time to vote.We all know that unless we can resolve the many many issues we are faced with today we will become a nation looked upon by our allies as a week and desperate nation trying to resolve the problems we have here and not being able to find the answers> i think that each and every one of us must pull together and get this great nation of ours moving in the right direction again so on Nov 4th do the right thing and vote

Yes, keep it up. You’re all doing exactly what the one party (Dempublicans/Republicrats) want you to do… Focus on the trivial. Don’t look at the real problems because it’s much more fun to talk about trivial matters. Right? While your country goes down the drain, While our one-party rulers transfer the wealth of this country from the poor and middle class to the super-rich at least we can have a little fun. What passes for intelligent thought, satire, and wit in this discussion is a painful reminder of the dumbing down of the American people. Adams and Jefferson would be appalled. Through away your televisions people!

malclave
you knock biden as a bad vp pick and then you knock him for not understanding the constitution
i wonder what you base your accusations on?
and then i wonder which ticket you are voting for this nov 4th
because it cant be mccain palin if you think bidens a terrible vp pick
then palins got to be like poison to you…
and if you think biden has no grasp of the constitution and you want to take some cracks at him for that, then you for surely want to blow yourself up when you think about palins knowledge of the constitution
since she doesnt even know what the role of the vp is or does

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a critic of the George W. Bush Administration and supports strengthened relations with Russia, Venezuela, Cuba, Syria, and the Persian Gulf states. He has said Iran’s nuclear program is for peaceful purposes and has refused to end nuclear enrichment despite United Nations Security Council resolutions. He has also called for the dissolution of the state of Israel and its government.
Does anyone care to explain why Obama would want to befriend this man some more? Why is he and the other heads of state from the other countries I just mentioned waiting for the night of Nov. 4th with champagne bottles, fireworks, confetti, and helium balloons? Could it be they just feel “safe” with him? Anyone care to clarify this?

A brilliant idea! If a stimulus package is really needed then why not just give those of us who pay taxes a few weeks of no tax on our paychecks.

Betty, given the foreign policy stance of Bush the last 8 years, Obama would be welcomed simply in terms of being willing to open dialogs. One of the main reasons for resentment of the US is in it’s current unilateral position of, as Bush put it in his simple minded monochromatic fashion “you are either with me or against me”. Obama, as do many other foreign policy experts including the 5 former secretary of states recently interviewed on CNN know that there is much more than simply a binary relationship between foreign countries, but a myriad of opportunities and areas open for discussion, even if positions on various issues appear to be at odds.
McCain has a very similar stance to foreign policy as Bush does, and is seen as such by most if not all foreign heads of state. It is no wonder the world is looking forward to a more rational and open stance from the US in terms of both consolidation and cooperation among nations, particularly in restoring trust in former friends and allies that Bush and his policies have eroded over the last 8 years.

McCain’s adviser says let’s see about another stimulus (hand-out) package (how’d that last one work out for us?), and Biden says McCain is “vascillating from one position to another” . . . which is it, Joe?? Joe “let’s divide Iraq into 3 separate countries” Biden says McCain has been wrong on all major foreign policy issues over the past 8 years? Like Russia/Georgia, Joe?? Like the surge, Joe?? Just two examples where The One was dead wrong. Joe Biden is trying his best to paint his candidate as having experience, but that dog just doesn’t hunt. Experience trumps inexperience every time, and McCain vs. Obama in the experience arena is like Walter Cronkite vs. Keith Olbermann.

Bhrandon, I haven’t seen anything which suggests that Palin doesn’t understand the role of the V.P.
There was the comment earlier inthe campaign, which Obama supporters deliberately misinterpreted. Then there was the more recent one, and the quote I’ve read seems within Constitutional guidelines. I guess the problem is she phrased the answer for a third-grader, which puts it well above the average Obama’s supporter’s understanding.

Oh, I forgot to cover what I base my attacks on Biden as VP on…
Basically, it’s the sheer hypocrisy of the left. Biden has made multiple statements that would have been screamed from the rooftops of every media building in New York if Palin had made them. Palin’s so-called “ethics violation” was an “October surprise” promised by an Obama supporter; if Obama was held to the same standard, he would be considered much more unethical.
But yeah, I’m almost certainly voting McCain unless something significant comes to light. The Democrats really put me off early on when they decided showing US servicemembers being blown up in an ad was a good idea, especially because the whole premise of the ad was a lie attacking McCain.

Wow, Sen. McCain is a partisan? Hmm, he isn’t really that conservative and he has gone against President Bush many times (immigration, campaign finance to name only a few). Sen Obama has voted 100 percent with the far left of Nancy Polosi, Reed, and Dean. Who is more partisan? Be honest you pesky libs! Now that that is out of the way, maybe you don’t recall but for the most part the Dems where against the first stimulus package, which did little in the long term. Now they are saying ‘lets give the people more money’. Hmm can you not see when you are being duped? McCain will eventually support some type of further stimulus because he’ll have too for political reasons. But you and I both know that it won’t do a damned thing in the long run for the economy.

Mccain wants to wait it out and see, and make sure of all his Rich Ceos can walk away with Big Golden Parachutes First! In Mccains world The Wealthy come First the Middleclass workers will have to wait!
Posted by: Angie
HEY ANGIE – Those so called Wealthy CEO that McCain has in his pockets have donated money to your friend Mr. Obama.

Why is Hidin’ Joe Biden avoiding reporters?

Planting Seeds of Disaster
ACORN, Barack Obama, and the Democratic party.
By Stanley Kurtz, Senior Fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Institute
‘You’ve got only a couple thousand bucks in the bank. Your job pays you dog-food wages. Your credit history has been bent, stapled, and mutilated. You declared bankruptcy in 1989. Don’t despair: You can still buy a house.” So began an April 1995 article in the Chicago Sun-Times that went on to direct prospective home-buyers fitting this profile to a group of far-left “community organizers” called ACORN, for assistance. In retrospect, of course, encouraging customers like this to buy homes seems little short of madness.
Militant ACORN
At the time, however, that 1995 Chicago newspaper article represented something of a triumph for Barack Obama. That same year, as a director at Chicago’s Woods Fund, Obama was successfully pushing for a major expansion of assistance to ACORN, and sending still more money ACORN’s way from his post as board chair of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Through both funding and personal-leadership training, Obama supported ACORN. And ACORN, far more than we’ve recognized up to now, had a major role in precipitating the subprime crisis.
I’ve already told the story of Obama’s close ties to ACORN leader Madeline Talbott, who personally led Chicago ACORN’s campaign to intimidate banks into making high-risk loans to low-credit customers. Using provisions of a 1977 law called the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), Chicago ACORN was able to delay and halt the efforts of banks to merge or expand until they had agreed to lower their credit standards — and to fill ACORN’s coffers to finance “counseling” operations like the one touted in that Sun-Times article. This much we’ve known. Yet these local, CRA-based pressure-campaigns fit into a broader, more disturbing, and still under-appreciated national picture. Far more than we’ve recognized, ACORN’s local, CRA-enabled pressure tactics served to entangle the financial system as a whole in the subprime mess. ACORN was no side-show. On the contrary, using CRA and ties to sympathetic congressional Democrats, ACORN succeeded in drawing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into the very policies that led to the current disaster.
In one of the first book-length scholarly studies of ACORN, Organizing Urban America, Rutgers University political scientist Heidi Swarts describes this group, so dear to Barack Obama, as “oppositional outlaws.” Swarts, a strong supporter of ACORN, has no qualms about stating that its members think of themselves as “militants unafraid to confront the powers that be.” “This identity as a uniquely militant organization,” says Swarts, “is reinforced by contentious action.” ACORN protesters will break into private offices, show up at a banker’s home to intimidate his family, or pour protesters into bank lobbies to scare away customers, all in an effort to force a lowering of credit standards for poor and minority customers. According to Swarts, long-term ACORN organizers “tend to see the organization as a solitary vanguard of principled leftists…the only truly radical community organization.”
ACORN’s Inside Strategy
Yet ACORN’s entirely deserved reputation for militance is balanced by its less-well-known “inside strategy.” ACORN has long employed Washington-based lobbyists who understand very well how the legislative game is played. ACORN’s national lobbyists may encourage and benefit from the militant tactics of their base, but in the halls of congress they play the game with smooth sophistication. The untold story of ACORN’s central role in the financial meltdown is about the one-two punch to the banking system administered by this outside/inside strategy.
Critics of the notion that CRA had a major impact on the subprime crisis ask how a law passed in 1977 could have caused a crisis in 2008? The answer has a lot to do with ACORN — and the critical years of 1990-1995. While the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act did call on banks to increase lending in poor and minority neighborhoods, its exact requirements were vague, and therefore open to a good deal of regulatory interpretation. Banks merger or expansion plans were rarely held up under CRA until the late 1980s, when ACORN perfected its technique of filing CRA complaints in tandem with the sort of intimidation tactics perfected by that original “community organizer” (and Obama idol), Saul Alinsky.
At first, ACORN’s anti-bank actions were relatively few in number. However, under a provision of the 1989 savings and loan bailout pushed by liberal Democratic legislators, like Massachusetts Congressman Joseph P. Kennedy, lenders were required to compile public records of mortgage applicants by race, gender, and income. Although the statistics produced by these studies were presented in highly misleading ways, groups like ACORN were able to use them to embarrass banks into lowering credit standards. At the same time, a wave of banking mergers in the early 1990′s provided an opening for ACORN to use CRA to force lending changes. Any merger could be blocked under CRA, and once ACORN began systematically filing protests over minority lending, a formerly toothless set of regulations began to bite.
ACORN’s efforts to undermine credit standards in the late 1980s taught it a valuable lesson. However much pressure ACORN put on banks to lower credit standards, tough requirements in the “secondary market” run by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac served as a barrier to change. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac buy up mortgages en masse, bundle them, and sell them to investors on the world market. Back then, Fannie and Freddie refused to buy loans that failed to meet high credit standards. If, for example, a local bank buckled to ACORN pressure and agreed to offer poor or minority applicants a 5-percent down-payment rate, instead of the normal 10-20 percent, Fannie and Freddie would refuse to buy up those mortgages. That would leave all the risk of these shaky loans with the local bank. So again and again, local banks would tell ACORN that, because of standards imposed by Fannie and Freddie, they could lower their credit standards by only a little.
So the eighties taught ACORN that a high-pressure, Alinskyite outside strategy wouldn’t be enough. Their Washington lobbyists would have to bring inside pressure on the government to undercut credit standards at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Only then would local banks consider making loans available to customers with bad credit histories, low wages, virtually nothing in the bank, and even bankruptcies on record.
Democrats and ACORN
As early as 1987, ACORN began pressuring Fannie and Freddie to review their standards, with modest results. By 1989, ACORN had lured Fannie Mae into the first of many “pilot projects” designed to help local banks lower credit standards. But it was all small potatoes until the serious pressure began in early 1991. At that point, Democratic Senator Allan Dixon convened a Senate subcommittee hearing at which an ACORN representative gave key testimony. It’s probably not a coincidence that Dixon, like Obama, was an Illinois Democrat, since Chicago has long been a stronghold of ACORN influence.
Dixon gave credibility to ACORN’s accusations of loan bias, although these claims of racism were disputed by Missouri Republican, Christopher Bond. ACORN’s spokesman strenuously complained that his organization’s efforts to relax local credit standards were being blocked by requirements set by the secondary market. Dixon responded by pressing Fannie and Freddie to do more to relax those standards — and by promising to introduce legislation that would ensure it. At this early stage, Fannie and Freddie walked a fine line between promising to do more, while protesting any wholesale reduction of credit requirements.
By July of 1991, ACORN’s legislative campaign began to bear fruit. As the Chicago Tribune put it, “Housing activists have been pushing hard to improve housing for the poor by extracting greater financial support from the country’s two highly profitable secondary mortgage-market companies. Thanks to the help of sympathetic lawmakers, it appeared…that they may succeed.” The Tribune went on to explain that House Democrat Henry Gonzales had announced that Fannie and Freddie had agreed to commit $3.5 billion to low-income housing in 1992 and 1993, in addition to a just-announced $10 billion “affordable housing loan program” by Fannie Mae. The article emphasizes ACORN pressure and notes that Fannie and Freddie had been fighting against the plan as recently as a week before agreement was reached. Fannie and Freddie gave in only to stave off even more restrictive legislation floated by congressional Democrats.
A mere month later, ACORN Housing Corporation president, George Butts made news by complaining to a House Banking subcommittee that ACORN’s efforts to pressure banks using CRA were still being hamstrung by Fannie and Freddie. Butts also demanded still more data on the race, gender, and income of loan applicants. Many news reports over the ensuing months point to ACORN as the key source of pressure on congress for a further reduction of credit standards at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. As a result of this pressure, ACORN was eventually permitted to redraft many of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s loan guideline.
Clinton and ACORN
ACORN’s progress through 1992 depended on its Democratic allies. Whatever ACORN managed to squeeze out of the George H. W. Bush administration came under congressional pressure. With the advent of the Clinton administration, however, ACORN’s fortunes took a positive turn. Clinton Housing Secretary Henry Cisnersos pledged to meet monthly with ACORN representatives. For ACORN, those meetings bore fruit.
Another factor working in ACORN’s favor was that its increasing success with local banks turned those banks into allies in the battle with Fannie and Freddie. Precisely because ACORN’s local pressure tactics were working, banks themselves now wanted Fannie and Freddie to loosen their standards still further, so as to buy up still more of the high-risk loans they’d made at ACORN’s insistence. So by the 1993, a grand alliance of ACORN, national Democrats, and local bankers looking for someone to lessen the risks imposed on them by CRA and ACORN were uniting to pressure Fannie and Freddie to loosen credit standards still further.
At this point, both ACORN and the Clinton administration were working together to impose large numerical targets or “set asides” (really a sort of poor and minority loan quota system) on Fannie and Freddie. ACORN called for at least half of Fannie and Freddie loans to go to low-income customers. At first the Clinton administration offered a set-aside of 30 percent. But eventually ACORN got what it wanted. In early 1994, the Clinton administration floated plans for committing $1 trillion in loans to low- and moderate-income home-buyers, which would amount to about half of Fannie Mae’s business by the end of the decade. Wall Street Analysts attributed Fannie Mae’s willingness to go along with the change to the need to protect itself against still more severe “congressional attack.” News reports also highlighted praise for the change from ACORN’s head lobbyist, Deepak Bhargava.
This sweeping debasement of credit standards was touted by Fannie Mae’s chairman, chief executive officer, and now prominent Obama adviser James A. Johnson. This is also the period when Fannie Mae ramped up its pilot programs and local partnerships with ACORN, all of which became precedents and models for the pattern of risky subprime mortgages at the root of today’s crisis. During these years, Obama’s Chicago ACORN ally, Madeline Talbott, was at the forefront of participation in those pilot programs, and her activities were consistently supported by Obama through both foundation funding and personal leadership training for her top organizers.
Finally, in June of 1995, President Clinton, Vice President Gore, and Secretary Cisneros announced the administration’s comprehensive new strategy for raising home-ownership in America to an all-time high. Representatives from ACORN were guests of honor at the ceremony. In his remarks, Clinton emphasized that: “Out homeownership strategy will not cost the taxpayers one extra cent. It will not require legislation.” Clinton meant that informal partnerships between Fannie and Freddie and groups like ACORN would make mortgages available to customers “who have historically been excluded from homeownership.”
Disaster
In the end of course, Clinton’s plan cost taxpayers an almost unimaginable amount of money. And it was just around the time of his 1995 announcement that the Chicago papers started encouraging bad-credit customers with “dog-food” wages, little money in the bank, and even histories of bankruptcy to apply for home loans with the help of ACORN. At both the local and national levels, then, ACORN served as the critical catalyst, levering pressure created by the Community Reinvestment Act and pull with Democratic politicians to force Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into a pattern of high-risk loans.
Up to now, conventional wisdom on the financial meltdown has relegated ACORN and the CRA to bit parts. The real problem, we’ve been told, lay with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. In fact, however, ACORN is at the base of the whole mess. ACORN used CRA and Democratic sympathizers to entangle Fannie and Freddie and the entire financial system in a disastrous disregard of the most basic financial standards. And Barack Obama cut his teeth as an organizer and politician backing up ACORN’s economic madness every step of the way.

http://whitenoiseinsanity.wordpress.com/2008/10/21/joe-lieberman-said-this-past-summer-that-john-mccain-will-be-tested-if-he-becomes-the-president-in-2009/
Joe Liberman for McCain

Biden basically said Obama is unqualified.
Obama criticised Biden for his views.
How can anyone take this Obama/Biden taken seriously!

Nastyasha,
Here’s the part you need to read about that poll, then read it again, again and again;
“The AP-GfK survey included interviews with a large sample of adults including 800 deemed likely to vote. Among all 1,101 adults interviewed, the survey showed Obama ahead 47 percent to 37 percent. He was up by five points among registered voters.”
PS – YOU LOSE!!!LOL!!!

The Tax System – Explained With Beer
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that’s what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. “Since you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.”Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men – the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his ‘fair share?’
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 ( 25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 ( 22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
“I only got a dollar out of the $20,”declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,” but he got $10!”
“Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more than I!”
“That’s true!!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!”
“Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison. “We didn’t get anything at all.
The system exploits the poor!”
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists, lawyers and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics
University of Georgia
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

ok, this is the first time i have voted in a presidential election. to me i cant get past american’s debating among themselves of who is going to do a better job of leading our country. will the bailout for the companies help us more, or will a check for individuals really be something that moves the economy forward. at this point is there really anything we can do? i honestly don’t know. yes i received a check last time, and i didn’t spend it on past due bills ( probably should have). so maybe if they get these checks issued before the holiday spending more people would opt to use this money for things that they “don’t need” and what they want to buy. will that boost the economy. and isn’t it true that no matter what amount of money we use and what it is for it is going to be “borrowed”? doesn’t this add to the deficit either way. i’m just trying to grasp this, without feeling like a moron. i have never registered to vote until now because i didn’t want to feel “responsible” for the wrong decision, which according to what i see was made previously. from what i have read and have watched the debates i see obama as being someone who is actually concerened, mccain acted like he was “almighty”. during the debates he just seemed like he was making his way around things and he felt like because he said “my friends” he connected with people. he just seemed cocky. maybe something petty to judge a president on though. to me obama seems like he is going to make the changes that need to be made, but i still dont feel like that will be done in the next 4 years. i think it is going to take a very long time to fix our problems. i dont think that a spending freeze would solve problems if it only affects a certain group of people. and i agree that something needs to be done about health care. i work with a health insurance provider, and i hate hearing stories about people’s lives being tossed up due to medical bills. i myself dont have coverage because i maxed it out on 3 visits, i think employers should be held responsible. maybe i need a voting for dummies book or something, im not sure

Joe Biden is an intelligent man that is not always in control of his tongue. But, he has brain and he reads and he knows foreign policy. Obama is controlled, intelligent and clearly has the ability to lead our nation. As for going to see his Grandmother, it’s the responsible thing to do. And that’s why I will vote for him. He is responsible. McCain is impulsive and Sarah is terrifying. I don’t want a theocracy!

I’m glad to see that the most articulate intelligent responses stem from Obama/Biden supporters. If intelligence is, as intelligence does, perhaps a bit more scrutiny would take place on the right—casting their votes on solid facts, dismissing sleazy smear tactics. If not? Oh well…I think it could be said that, “Two Rights [Palin/McCain] Can Make A Wrong!”