McCain Ad Hits Obama on Financial Crisis

Nice to see McCain hitting back!!!!!!!!

Zack, you need to go to the DailKos and play with the kids over there.

You can all circle jerk over the Obama talking points over there.

Chek this video… great stuff! Obama won’t be happy, that’s for sure.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usvG-s_Ssb0

oh

Make no mistake, if McCain-Palin lose the upcoming election, it WILL be because of the economy and fears generated by Obamanation. Learn all you can and fight back with facts. Never stop talking about these facts with your friends & family … and perfect strangers!!

Doug,

Everybody knows the Wall Street Journal is so in the tank for Obama.

Tit for tat for those tight states, Mike:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/17/obama_ad_mccain_helps_ship_job.html

100 plus hours now and Obama’s poll lead is up again, all convention bounces gone now.

All chips in on the debates!

Doug, you must have missed the “on topic” editorial while you were over at WaPo:

‘Always for Less Regulation’?
John McCain’s record on Wall Street oversight gets some misleading spin from Barack Obama.

Friday, September 19, 2008; A18

TO LISTEN to Sen. Barack Obama, Sen. John McCain is a Johnny-come-lately to the cause of regulating financial markets. “He has consistently opposed the sorts of common-sense regulations that might have lessened the current crisis,” Mr. Obama said in New Mexico yesterday. “When I was warning about the danger ahead on Wall Street months ago because of the lack of oversight, Senator McCain was telling the Wall Street Journal — and I quote — ‘I’m always for less regulation.’ ”

But the full quotation from Mr. McCain’s March interview with the Journal’s editorial board belies Mr. Obama’s one-sided rendition. The Republican candidate went on to say, “But I am aware of the view that there is a need for government oversight. I think we found this in the subprime lending crisis — that there are people that game the system and if not outright broke the law, they certainly engaged in unethical conduct which made this problem worse. So I do believe that there is role for oversight.”

It’s fair to say that Mr. McCain has dramatically ramped up the regulatory rhetoric in the wake of the meltdown on Wall Street. Mr. Obama made the argument about the need for increased oversight much earlier. And Mr. McCain has generally taken an anti-regulatory stance, although not in all cases — his support for federal regulation of tobacco and boxing being prominent counter-examples. Mr. McCain backed a moratorium on all new federal regulation in 1995, saying that excessive regulations were “destroying the American family, the American dream.” On the campaign trail in 2000, he touted his record of voting “for smaller government, for less regulation.”

However, when it comes to regulating financial institutions and corporate misconduct, Mr. McCain’s record is more in keeping with his current rhetoric. In the aftermath of the Enron collapse and other accounting scandals, he was a leader, with Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.), in pushing to require that companies treat stock options granted to employees as expenses on their balance sheets. “I have long opposed unnecessary regulation of business activity, mindful that the heavy hand of government can discourage innovation,” he wrote in a July 2002 op-ed in the New York Times. “But in the current climate only a restoration of the system of checks and balances that once protected the American investor — and that has seriously deteriorated over the past 10 years — can restore the confidence that makes financial markets work.”

Mr. McCain was an early voice calling for the resignation of Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Harvey Pitt, charging that he “seems to prefer industry self-policing to necessary lawmaking. Government’s demands for corporate accountability are only credible if government executives are held accountable as well.”

In 2006, he pushed for stronger regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — while Mr. Obama was notably silent. “If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole,” Mr. McCain warned at the time.

One element of the Obama campaign’s brief against Mr. McCain is that he supported repeal of the law separating commercial banks from investment banks. “He’s spent decades in Washington supporting financial institutions instead of their customers,” Mr. Obama said yesterday. “Phil Gramm, one of the architects of the deregulation in Washington that led directly to this mess on Wall Street, is also the architect of John McCain’s economic plan.” Would it be churlish to point out that another author of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley law is former congressman Jim Leach, a founder of Republicans for Obama? Or that Obama advisers Lawrence H. Summers and Robert E. Rubin supported the repeal — which was signed by President Bill Clinton?

It’s a reasonable question which candidate has been more attentive to the brewing problems on Wall Street and which has a better prescription for them. But Mr. Obama’s attack does not give a fair reading of the McCain record.

The real reason goes back many different administrations. Both Dems and Repubs are at fault for not seeing the writing on the wall.

But it got worse during the Clinton Administration when they got rid of “Red Lining” that is the practive of not giving loans to places tat were red lined becasue the people there were most likely not going to pay back the loans. But many people called it racist and Clinton changed the Community Re-investment bill. Or he put the program on Steroids, I think that was a quote out of Washington post, but I do not have it right at hand.

My brother who is in the banking business pretty much told my mom that this is what brought on the whole mess. And today at the NRO they had this:

Friday, September 19, 2008

Mark Levin, Now [Lisa Schiffren]

I always listen to Mark Levin while making Friday night dinner. Tonight he is giving the most serious, intelligent, cogent explanation of the current economic crisis I have heard or read anywhere. He is giving a precise political and legislative history going back several administrations, but concentrated in the Clinton Administration, where the major changes that led down this road were initiated. Funnily enough, he has explained just what it is community organizers do. Advocating, for instance, for affordable housing for the poor — the poor who traditionally rent, because they are bad loan risks. The day that reasoning by banks was junked as “racist,” was the day this crisis became a possibility. I don’t think he’s ad-libbing — and I, for one would love to read the transcript at NRO in the next day or two.

09/19 06:39 PM

Both my brothers work for banks and both saw this coming a long time ago. The bubble in the housing market was going to burst

This is the reason that many banks are collapsing. Too many gave loans to people that were not qualified for loans, but the Regulation that the Clinton administration did made it so banks can lower the qualification for loans. You do not even need to bring in a pay stub to get a loan now, just sign an affidavit and you got your money.

too many banks gave loans out to people thy should not have given loans to. Not all did this and they are still stable, but the big one’s that would think the Federal Government would bail them out did do it and we got the shaft.

This started long ago and neither party did anything to stop it. They both should be castigated. Both Bush and McCain tried to do something, but the Dems blocked it because it was a cash cow for them and their minions.

Yes the people giving pout the loans did prey on these people also. it is one big mess and many people to blame.
I hope that the big deal that Bush and CONgress will not make it worse. They need to make an exampLe and not just bail these banks out.

And I know that some of these bad loans were given to people that were trying to make money off of property. Looking at the infomercialS and thinking they can make big money owning property, but got in over their head.

It is one big clusterf**k.

Yes I am partisan, but I do have a brain and do not get talking points from anyone.