President Obama Recycles Old McCain Housing Slam as he Returns to Campaign Mode for Stimulus

You are the only person who thinks calling an idea old refers only to John McCain. Is Obama allowed to say he has an old pair of shoes?
A
N
D
Obama is right that it is crazy that people can negotiate interest in bankruptcy court on 2nd house, but not first.

Yeah, he forgot where he was there for a minute.
I think he also forgot he is President when he made a little slam about Japan. They are a good ally, and he doesn’t need to restart the anti-Japan automobile scare of the 80′s.
It seemed to me the people in that audience want money in their pockets. They didn’t want the money being funneled through someone else- a government agency, a company, whatever.
I would also love to know if they felt better about the jobs Obama was offering them. He seemed to be telling them they were all about to become construction workers, winterproofing houses and fixing school buildings.

And what was with the uniformed service people sitting on camera behind Obama during a domestic policy speech? Whose choice was it to seat them there?

samofcarolina:What he said made sense, but glad to see you are trying to get on drudge again.
=====
It does make some sense, but the change he mentions is not in this bill.

Jake,
Obama didn’t even mention McCain so I don’t think this was a slam to McCain.

C’mon, Jake. This is rather petty, don’t you think? I second 33Greeper’s comment…where EXACTLY did he mention McCain.
As they say, “There’s no THERE there.”

Jake
I dont think your being Fair here he never Said anything about Mccain! Dont be like Fox News Jake.

Good grief, I like ABC so I’ve tried following your blog hoping that one day you would finally start reporting the “news”; but after this I’ve come to the decision that you’re just pathetic! Once again I say, Get Over It Already!

Oh come now, just because when you hear the words “Old” and “Worn Out” McCain immediately comes to mind, doesn’t mean that President was referring to him.

So what exactly is wrong about what he said? Plus, like everyone else seems to have noticed, where is McLame in that little thing?

I vote for impeaching Obama.

Another unsupported, incendiary headline. That’s two in the last five days. You’ve got the front row now. For good or ill at the most compelling, important time in the last fifty years. You’re sitting next to Helen Thomas it’s time to start getting real.

Jake:
You have written in your article: 72-years-young Sen John McCain. After he has watched more than seven decades passby, is he still young on the earth!!!!!

Honestly, I find it difficult to work up to any sympathy for people who purchased these homes that were beyond their income means. So their “flip” “flopped.” The cheese fell off their crackers long ago.

I’m happy to see fair and balanced reporting again. It’s really hard to find that outside FOX cause everyone just jumps on all the same bandwagons with the rest of the media and you read recycled news again and again or you have to watch it but thank you Jake for your diferent approach from all the other MSM dittoed programming and I really appreciate that because I like to stay informed and accurate about all he stuff going on in the nation and the universe. Your rockin Jake keep up the good work.

More than a stimulus plan, this appears to be an attempt at a coup d’état by Obama and the democrats.

Wow. You just went and made yourself up a story, didn’t you? This is why people aren
‘t paying attention to the MSM anymore. Take heed, when people are unsarcastically saying you’re are unbiased as Fox, it’s time to take a good hard look at yourself.

I want to own seven houses. And I dont care how many houses Obama owns. We live in America.

Obama doing what he does best–mocking anyone that threatens him.
Reminds me of the time he mocked plumbers and made that silly lipstick joke.
He looks immature, petty, and thin-skinned.

If Obama supposedly knows so much about how the rich accumulate wealth, why does he keep going after people’s income?
The very wealthy usually have very little of their money coming in as income. Hence, Warren Buffett’s little ruse about paying less than his secretary in taxes.
Please, President Obama, stop wanting to tax the heck out of income earners to hand money out to ACORN, pet projects and the non-payers. This bill won’t stimulate anything other than Chris Matthews’ thighs.

“Mr. Smartest PBO, where were you 2 years ago on the foreclosure issue before it got out of hand and became unsolvable?”
Who was President two years ago?
Where was he?

Does the obama talk in his campain and now sound like the pied pipper that loured the rats over the clift or does he sound like the antichrist promising anything and everything that sounds good too the Dem’s.

Obama is a hot mess.
2012 can’t come soon enough to chase this loser out of office.
He was supposed to transcend politics, but he is petulant, petty and self-righteous. He doesn’t seem to have the capacity for larger than life leadership that the electorate fell for. P.T. Barnum was right. America is full of suckers.

Well, I don’t own one house. I own zero houses. In ordinary times, right now would be about when I’d start looking to buy my first house, having saved a reasonable down payment for the expensive urban real estate market where I live. But these days, with the economy what it is and my employer annoucing layoffs, I’m doing the cautious thing and waiting.
As it happens, looking over the stimulus package, I don’t qualify for any of the tax cuts, and needless to say, won’t be helped by any of the homeowners assistance.
Now as it happens, as a good liberal, I don’t particularly mind that. What I do mind is this idea of trying to drum up support by promising free money to most people and demonizing as the filthy rich everyone who worries that maybe we’re doing this too quickly or we won’t be able to afford this down the road. You’re much richer than I am, President Obama.

In the end its going to be a fascist warlord bent on murdering and slaughtering people to accomplish his military thundering rule after the United States fails under Obama.

Thanks you, Skippy Peanuts, for providing another example to my point that old ideas and their attending fear aren’t age specific. BTW, your rhetoric is as disgusting as the salmonella disease. Can’t you find something better to do than submitting this noxious stuff from your parent’s basement?

What term best describes our President:
a. Clown
b. Thief
c. Ego-Maniac
d. Incompetent Knucklehead
(OK, I know I can’t ask you to choose just one)
The higher they are built up, the harder they fall. And there will be backlash, despite the infratstucture Team Obama is building (billions and political cover for ACORN, secret dealing to bring 2010 Census under guidance of Chief of Staff Emanuel, etc.) the American people will come to their senses and the media will be come around. This is my only source of optimism. As far as the economy is concerned, with the passage of this “stimulus” package and Obama’s ideology, I don’t have any hope of a recovery anytime soon, nor am I hopeful the U.S. will flourish to the degree we have in our recent past.
I’m not a doom-and-gloom person. I understand business and macroeconomics and it is pretty clear to me we are headed in the wrong direction. On many levels.

old as in say, 2008, or old as in say, 1932.
because the first would apply to mccain, and the second would apply to the idiot.

Thinking:
I love this comment:
“The GOP is old and worn out. What the heck can’t speak the truth anymore?
Fact is the GOP is drying up and shriveling.
Get a life folks”
The GOP is dying because the Country Club Moderates ran one of their own and he lost. When they get back to running on Constitutionally limited Government, low taxes, no IRS, then they will win again. Unfortunately, they are not going to do that, so it will be the Libertarians to do this either through the Libertarian Party or Libertarian Agenda. As for Obama’s plan, it will go down in flames as every Keynesian/Socialist Public Works Stimulus has, i.e. the Pilgrims, Russians, Chinese(they’re going capitalist), and the Hoover/FDR plan.
Yes, according to Morgantheau, FDR’s Treasury Secretary, FDR’s plan was an extrapolation of Hoover’s plan.

Bankruptcy is not the answer – for government or us.
Avoid all the traps that come with “trappings”. Debt is stupid – plain and simple. Cut up your credit cards before starting.
1. Save a thousand dollars for emergencies.
2. Pay off all your debts (except the house if you have one) smallest to largest, remaining current on all if possible.
3. Save 3 to 6 months of expenses (including your first thousand) in case of emergency.
4. Start saving 15% of your income for retirement.
5. Start saving for your childrens college education.
6. Pay off the house.
7. Build wealth and give generously.
If your kids are too old, skip 5.

Bankruptcy is not the answer – for government or us.
Avoid all the traps that come with “trappings”. Debt is stupid – plain and simple. Cut up your credit cards before starting.
1. Save a thousand dollars for emergencies.
2. Pay off all your debts (except the house if you have one) smallest to largest, remaining current on all if possible.
3. Save 3 to 6 months of expenses (including your first thousand) in case of emergency.
4. Start saving 15% of your income for retirement.
5. Start saving for your childrens college education.
6. Pay off the house.
7. Build wealth and give generously.
If your kids are too old, skip 5.
Posted by: Stephen | Feb 10, 2009 9:45:21 AM
———————–
GEE YOU MUST HAVE A JOB!
I GUESS I HAVE TO SKIP TO THE WELFARE ROLLS! THE LINES ARE LONG!

By the way, the time of the bank run on September 15, 2008
was when oprah went to Saudi Arabia, mere accident, I think not.
She and her money visited Saudi Arabia under the guise of
“women” mentor.

To those objecting to this law that Obama wants to modify, are you saying someone with only one home who gets in financial difficulty is a deadbeat but someone who has mulitiple houses is just down on their luck? How else do you justify the different treatment for different income brackets? You do realize that one of the top reasons people lost their homes to foreclosure in the past was due to medical problems.
It is a great idea to change the law regarding a bankruptcy judge’s ability to modify mortgage payments to prevent foreclosures on homes that are the only house a person in debt owns.
Anyone who objects to this is unreasonably cruel and short-sighted as to the harm this is doing to the housing market. As Obama stated, right now a judge can modify the mortgage on someone in debt who owns multiple houses. How is that a fair thing? How does a formerly rich person have more rights than a regular person with one home? Either cancel the privilege for the person with multiple houses or extend the privilege to all.
This new law will help stem the tide of foreclosed houses going on the market. This in turn should help stabilize house prices, and thus help the economy.
Think people, don’t just write a knee-jerk reaction because you don’t like who is president. Think about it honestly.
And Jake, unless I missed something, or you forgot to put it in the article, I didn’t hear Obama mention McCain. He is simply stating who benefits from the existing law and who is left out. Obama is reiterating why he wants the law changed. Stop adding to the anti bi-partisan feeling and just tell us what is going on in Washington. We all need to pull together, supporting any legislation that is fair and will help the economy. You are a good writer except when you add anti bi-partisan junk to your story or headline.

Something folks are missing here is that if someone goes into Bankruptcy, a creditor and debtor are free to renegotiate the terms if they choose. If the judge agrees to the terms he will allow it. Also, before the home enters foreclosure, the homeowner knows it and can negotiate with the bank if the bank is willing. Whichever the scenario, if they are in Bankruptcy and neither of these options is chosen, then the bank has decided it wants the home back in lieu of the payments from the homeowner. They would rather try and sell the home to try and recover something.
What the president is saying is, once again, the government knows better than the two individuals in the deal. SO they will tell you what the terms of the contract should be. WHAT COMPANY WILL LEND ANYONE A DIME IF THEY KNOW THE GOVERNMENT CAN REWRITE THE DEAL OUT FROM UNDERTHEM????? You want to see a credit freeze? Let this pass. It has NOTHING to do with rich and poor. If you had a 100,000 to lend someone, you would NEVER lend them the money without some security. Under the presidents plan, you would be owed 100,000 but the person you lent it to cannot pay so they go bankrupt. They can only pay about 60,000. Well you will lose the 40,000 (Maybe get a tax write off) and you won’t be able to foreclose for the value.
Its not something the government should mess with. Its a vaguely nobel idea but stay out for everyones sake.