Palin unleashed

[jinjuku]

Think about this:

From the Habitat for Humanity website:

What does a Habitat house cost?
Throughout the world, the cost of houses varies from as little as $800 in some developing countries to an average of nearly $60,000 in the United States.

Habitat houses are affordable for low-income families because there is no profit included in the sale price. Mortgage length varies from seven to 30 years

A $60K loan at 6% interest at 30years would be ~$450/month. This is were some of it seems to have went very wrong.

 

[itschris]

The goal was originally to help the poor get into a house AFFORDABLEY.

Instead of building housing that was AFFORDABLE and letting conventional 30 year fixed interest loans be handed out... It was a trickle down theory. Put a ton of bureaucracy between the government and the citizens it was trying to help.

It's the whole trying to break the cycle of: Poverty, Illiteracy, Under/Uneducated peoples.

Fixed cost housing co-ops aren't a new idea. There are example of where they work. What really happened is that banks were supposed to loosen up lending requirements a bit to help those more in need. What really happened is $$ was being made for the QUANTITY of transactions. Not the quality.
Banks, brokers, investors all became so open minded that their brain fell out. It was about how many applications they could get approved. Then when it was underwritten by someone like Freddie/Fannie they could wash their hands of it.

Sorda, but not really. When you allow wellfare revenue to count towards your family income for loan purposes... then that in and of itself is an issue. That's the kind of thing that was mandated, later questioned, and dismissed in committee.

The guy who was in charge at the time when the most damage was done, was Frank Raines. It concerns me that Obama has this guy advising him on economic policy. Raines became an even more rich man when he left Fannie. I just question his judgement. There's all these people in his life with questionable character, but it's always dismissed. Does that not say somehting? How is Obama able to criticize the current financial crisis, CEO compensation, and the policies surrounding the issue when the guy, who many feel was knee deep in the cause, is one of his right hand men?

For me, Bush failed in the sense that he did not take these issues to the people. When Reagan didn't get his way, he went on TV and explained the issue and forced people's hands. Bush didn't do that and I feel as President, he has that responsibility. When you have the people who oversee these agencies getting paid, not by the members, but by the agency and the PAC itself, that should raise an eyebrow and Bush should've taken it to the public. He hasn't done that enough in my opinion.

 

[emorphien]

It's just funny how most liberals won't ever concede anything questionable about what goes on.

As if it were only the liberals. Just as many conservatives are guilty of the same thing. Unfortunately so many people now on all sides seem blinded by party politics and have lost reason when it comes to discussing or working out problems.

It's hard enough keeping up with everything all the politicians in this country do, but when you have right biased and left biased media and if don't know who to believe, you'll be severely misguided and misserved by the media. From following things as much on my own and figuring out the facts as much as I can, I'd rather watch the satirical and admittedly left leaning Daily Show and right parodying Colbert Report because at least I know how to weed the truth out of what they're saying.

I have particularly enjoyed the segments where Stewart gives Obama a hard time, but I think he avoids digging too deep in to either candidate, but especially Obama at times because I suspect a lot of his viewers like Obama and IIRC Stewart does too. On the whole I think I like Obama better than McCain but I don't think either would be the leader we need.

 

[Rickster71]

I posted this elsewhere, though it's a good fit in this thread too:

We were at a party a few weeks back, and at our table, we sat with some people that were up pretty high on the banking industry food chain.
I had a very fascinating, and lengthy conversation.
The short story is: The lending industry was deregulated, as payback by our government, for making the industry give loans to people that were bad credit risks. It was described to me as "Social Engineering"
The link below, describes a bit of that.
http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=usvG-s_Ssb0

 

[Davemcc]

The guy who was in charge at the time when the most damage was done, was Frank Raines. It concerns me that Obama has this guy advising him on economic policy. Raines became an even more rich man when he left Fannie. I just question his judgement. There's all these people in his life with questionable character, but it's always dismissed. Does that not say somehting? How is Obama able to criticize the current financial crisis, CEO compensation, and the policies surrounding the issue when the guy, who many feel was knee deep in the cause, is one of his right hand men?

Chris, you say all the things I want to say except you say it much better than I can.

 

[itschris]

Thanks Dave. I appreciate the sentiment. Our firm has about 4,000 home office employees and about another 5,500 or so advisors, traders, and analysts. I'm the Sr. Analyst for the CEO and CAO of our independent contractor division and we have assets of over 120 billion ourselves. Believe me, politics is not just a passing interest. Most of the Sr. and Executive Staff and Managment are knee deep in it because we know what the actual impact of policies, taxation, and regulation have on the economy... it's what we do.

As much as I know, there's a ton that I don't, and it's that part the concerns me the most. With McCain you know what you got. With Hiillary, you would've known what you got. With Obama, I think there's either a disconnect, an absence, or an arrogrance firmly nestled as the driving force behind him.

Geraldine Ferraro made the comment that he got where he was because he's black. Even as a very liberal Democrat, she was villified for that and forced out of her role in the Clinton campaign. He's not where he is simply because he's black, because he's also a fantastic orator when he has the speech had been well rehearsed. He has a charisma that is undeniable and he's an intelligent, albeit shrewd individual that knows how to succeed. The fact of the matter though is that no other person would have gotten the exposure, and the blind support of the media culture the way he has. It's like everyone has been blinded by his aura. The sad truth is, if he was just some well spoken white guy, a year into his first congressional term, he would've been dismissed a long time ago had he ventured into such an endeavor. But just the thought, the idea, that you this well spoken, intelligent and ariculate African American could be President, captured the world. I'm proud of that on one hand, but sad that it even matters on the other.

When it comes to issues like the bailout, who was really responsible, and the political games that were played out for the mere purpose of being able to point a finger later or take credit at some other time, we have to be educated on the facts and know what's going on. Our livlihood depends on it. It's not a game or luxury for us. Technically, my firm is now the largest investment bank in the country. That would have been funny to suggest just a month or so ago. That's how serious things are out there.

 

[Rickster71]

It's sad, the same Political Correctness that's the root of the Fannie, Freddie mess;
is also what helps prop up Obama, the Straw Man candidate.
That, along with George Soros, and ACORN.
See link to New York article: http://sweetness-light.com/archive/thank-acorn-and-their-ilk-for-mortgage-crisis

 

[billy p]

Apparently, conservatives now believe that Gwen Ifill isn't objective enough to moderate the VP debate! Her book entitled "The Breakthrough" deals with race and politics with many black leaders listed and among them is Barack Obama, although that chapter hasn't being written yet. I wonder if she was a white journalist her sincerity would come into play. She did well enough in the 2004 debate you'd would think she is qualified and unbiased.

 

[Rickster71]

Apparently, conservatives now believe that Gwen Ifill isn't objective enough to moderate the VP debate! Her book entitled "The Breakthrough" deals with race and politics with many black leaders listed and among them is Barack Obama, although that chapter hasn't being written yet. I wonder if she was a white journalist her sincerity would come into play. She did well enough in the 2004 debate you'd would think she is qualified and unbiased.

The 'Full' title of Ifill’s book? “Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama.”

 

[zhimbo]

The guy who was in charge at the time when the most damage was done, was Frank Raines. It concerns me that Obama has this guy advising him on economic policy.

If by "advising him" you mean Raines and someone from the Obama campaign have ever talked at some point, then you're right. But Raines is not part of the campaign, is not an official advisor, has never been on Obama's payroll, etc.. The Obama campaign has talked to literally hundreds of people gathering information and opinions to sort through policy matters. He was just one of many that someone contacted at some point.

This is one of several gross distortions that the McCain campaign has put forward - the idea that Raines is any sort of official advisor.

The idea that he's a "right hand man" of Obama is simply laughable.

 

[billy p]

The 'Full' title of Ifill’s book? “Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama.”

This book was in the works well before Obama's candidicy. Regardless of that fact how can writting a book which isn't complete, threaten the VP debate. John McCain, acknowledged confidence in her objectivity and yet conservatives always seem to make this sort of a race issue. I'm so looking forward towards tonight.

 

[Rickster71]

This book was in the works well before Obama's candidicy. Regardless of that fact how can writting a book which isn't complete, threaten the VP debate. John McCain, acknowledged confidence in her objectivity and yet conservatives always seem to make this sort of a race issue. I'm so looking forward towards tonight.

It gives the appearance of a conflict of interest.
Gwen Ifil has a financial interest in who wins the race.
She is writing a book favorable to Barack Obama and it's due out on inauguration day.

I don't think Gwen Ifil will be as blatantly bias as Katie Couric, or Charlie Gibson.
Though, I do think all the moderators should be registered Independents, instead of all registered Democrats.

 

[cbraver]

I know one thing for sure, if Sarah Palin looks like an idiot tonight, it is for sure going to be Gwen Infils fault and not hers.

I don't really think Katie Couric is that great, but, her questions didn't strike me as unreasonable. Actually, I think she could have asked a lot tougher and more leading questions. She just asked obvious stuff, it's not like she asked about anything that you wouldn't anticipate. Anyone could have given that interview. Her follow up questions that seemed to stump Sarah were just from lack of knowledge and usually she would walk herself into the rut not Katie. I don't think Katie was even expecting it to go that bad, you can see the awe on her face.

 

[jinjuku]

I know one thing for sure, if Sarah Palin looks like an idiot tonight, it is for sure going to be Gwen Infils fault and not hers.

WHAT?! are you joking? If Sarah Palin looks the fool it WON'T be her fault. Now I KNOW the USA is a society of 'not my fault.'

Palin can't even come up with any books that she has read for pete's sake.

How hard of a question is that? I simply can't believe you put that statement out there.

 

[cbraver]

WHAT?! are you joking? If Sarah Palin looks the fool it WON'T be her fault. Now I KNOW the USA is a society of 'not my fault.'

Palin can't even come up with any books that she has read for pete's sake.

How hard of a question is that? I simply can't believe you put that statement out there.

I was being sarcastic, read the rest of the post (and the rest of my posts in this thread).

 

[rnatalli]

It doesn't matter what happens tonight. The GOP ticket is going down in flames.

 

[cbraver]

It doesn't matter what happens tonight. The GOP ticket is going down in flames.

I have to admit I kind of like watching the trainwreck though. It's like watching your friend get drunk and accidently make out with his cousin or something.

 

[cbraver]

So far no trainwreck.

I can't believe that neither of them support gay marriage (Well, I knew Sarah didn't, but not Joe). Did I hear that right from him?! Who gives a **** if they want to get married?! I know this might not be the biggest issue, but I'm surprised the vice president nominee under a minority presidential nominee.

 

[unreal.freak]

Throw Biden as Pres. and Palin as V.P. on a ticket.....I would vote for them


Peace,
Tommy

 

[jvgillow]

Joe Biden's "bridge to nowhere" zinger was great

Anybody else bothered by the constant "nuculars" from Palin? I thought everybody would have learned to avoid that Bushism by now.