Degree of Madness

Speaker Pelosi, could you be a little more specific?

Here is Nancy Pelosi, attempting to get (bipartisan) support for the (failed) bailout bill:

"[W]hen was the last time someone asked you for $700bn? It is a number that is staggering, but tells us only the costs of the Bush administration's failed economic policies — policies built on budgetary recklessness, on an anything-goes mentality, with no regulation, no supervision, and no discipline in the system."

Pelosi gives no examples of said recklessness, points to no specific economic policy.  Just a partisan hack job that too many people will take to heart - and to the voting booth. 

Barack Obama, sticking with the Democratic talking points, didn't back up his words either.  In his opening remarks at last week's debate, Obama had this to say about the current economic mess:

And, No. 4, we've got to make sure that we're helping homeowners, because the root problem here has to do with the foreclosures that are taking place all across the country.

Now, we also have to recognize that this is a final verdict on eight years of failed economic policies promoted by George Bush, supported by Senator McCain, a theory that basically says that we can shred regulations and consumer protections and give more and more to the most, and somehow prosperity will trickle down.

Just exactly what "failed economic policies" is he talking about?  Who knows, he didn't say. 

Maryland Democrat Chris Van Hollen, in an interview on Fox News - after the failed vote today - also chimed in with the Democratic talking points saying we "got into this mess by Bush administration policies".  Again, no specifics. 

Thankfully, I do have some specifics.  They do not, however, involve failed economic policies promoted by George Bush, supported by Senator McCain:

To hear today’s Democrats, you’d think all this started in the last couple years. But the crisis began much earlier. The Carter-era Community Reinvestment Act forced banks to lend to uncreditworthy borrowers, mostly in minority areas. Age-old standards of banking prudence got thrown out the window. In their place came harsh new regulations requiring banks not only to lend to uncreditworthy borrowers, but to do so on the basis of race.

These well-intended rules were supercharged in the early 1990s by President Clinton. Despite warnings from GOP members of Congress in 1992, Clinton pushed extensive changes to the rules requiring lenders to make questionable loans. [...] Failure to comply meant your bank might not be allowed to expand lending, add new branches or merge with other companies. Banks were given a so-called “CRA rating” that graded how diverse their lending portfolio was. [...] In the name of diversity, banks began making huge numbers of loans that they previously would not have. They opened branches in poor areas to lift their CRA ratings.

Meanwhile, Congress gave Fannie and Freddie the go-ahead to finance it all by buying loans from banks, then repackaging and securitizing them for resale on the open market. That’s how the contagion began. With those changes, the subprime market took off. From a mere $35 billion in loans in 1994, it soared to $1 trillion by 2008.

Is this one of the Bush administration's economic policies that got us into this mess?:

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

...

The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.

Couldn't be since the Democrats blocked President Bush's attempts to "protect consumers" with more regulation.  Massachusetts Democrat Barney Frank (who received such praise today from Nancy Pelosi) pooh-poohed the administration's attempt to reign in Freddie and Fannie:

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Who's exaggerating now, Mr. Frank?

John McCain, in 2006:

For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac--known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs--and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO's report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO's report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.

Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae's regulator reported that the company's quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were "illusions deliberately and systematically created" by the company's senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight's report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae's former chief executive officer, OFHEO's report shows that over half of Mr. Raines' compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac.

The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator's examination of the company's accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.

But Barney Frank said those entities were in fine shape.  Right Speaker Pelosi?  It's Bush's fault:

"...the Bush administration's failed economic policies — policies built on budgetary recklessness, on an anything-goes mentality, with no regulation, no supervision, and no discipline in the system."

Here's a little history lesson for you:

...

P.S.  (Via Sister Toldjah) Boston Globe's Jeff Jacoby:  "Frank's fingerprints are all over the financial fiasco". 

Rep. Thaddeus McCotter: NO to the Paulson splurge

"Just as we understand the need to act quickly, we also understand the need to act appropriately".   

Well done. Thanks to the House Republicans for stopping the madness.

Do you want fries with that?

John Boehner called the bailout bill a "crap sandwich", yet he still expects American taxpayers to pay for it: 

In a closed-door session with House Republicans, Minority Leader John A. Boehner just called the financial rescue deal a “crap sandwich” – then said he’ll vote for it when it comes to the floor Monday.

This is obscene.  Contrary to what I thought last night, the current bill is worse than the one proposed by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, according to anti-bailout conservatives.  Michelle Malkin:

I listened in on a phone conference this evening with anti-bailout conservatives, congressional staffers, and other Hill insiders. With only one exception, the groups and individuals on the call all opposed the bailout in its current form. They also concurred that this deal is worse than the one Paulson proposed — on constitutional, policy, and fiscal grounds. Phone calls to congressional offices continue to show overwhelming public opposition to the massive, unprecedented government giveaway.

Among the many problems with the bill is the "blank check" given to Paulson.  Think the bill just covers mortgages (which would be bad enough)?  Think again:

Another staffer raises alarm bells about the unfettered authority the bill gives to Treasury Secretary Paulson to define “troubled assets” any way he pleases — way beyond mortgages:

TROUBLED ASSETS.—The term ‘‘troubled assets’’ means—
(A) residential or commercial mortgages and any securities, obligations, or other instruments that are based on or related to such mortgages, that in each case was originated or issued on or before March 14, 2008, the purchase of which the Secretary determines promotes financial market stability; and

(B) any other financial instrument that the Secretary, after consultation with the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, determines the purchase of which is necessary to promote financial market stability, but only upon transmittal of such determination, in writing, to the appropriate committees of Congress.

Think the bill corrects the underlying problems that caused this mess in the first place?  Better rethink that as well:

Section 110 is the Democrat-backed “Assistance to homeowners” plan — driven by one of the bill’s key stated goals of “preserving homeownership.”

GENERAL.—To the extent that the Federal property manager holds, owns, or controls mortgages, mortgage backed securities, and other assets ecured by residential real estate, including multifamily housing, the Federal property manager shall implement a plan that seeks to maximize assistance for homeowners and use its authority to encourage the servicers of the underlying mortgages, and considering net present value to the taxpayer, to take advantage of the HOPE for Homeowners Program under section 257 of the National Housing Act or other available programs to minimize foreclosures.

(2) MODIFICATIONS.—In the case of a residential mortgage loan, modifications made under paragraph (1) may include—
(A) reduction in interest rates;
(B) reduction of loan principal; and
(C) other similar modifications.

Yes, in the quest to “preserve homeownership” at all costs, it appears the government will be determining the value of homes directly in the marketplace — not only reducing interest rates but also loan principal.

Michelle has much more and it's all bad.  IMHO.

.....

Dan Riehl notes what I consider an outright lie by Barack Obama in last week's debate.  Referring to the current financial crisis, Obama laid the blame at the feet of President Bush and John McCain:

So, how did the egotistical upstart Obama play it? Just see one of his very first comments on that very topic itself:

Now, we also have to recognize that this is a final verdict on eight years of failed economic policies promoted by George Bush, supported by Senator McCain, a theory that basically says that we can shred regulations and consumer protections and give more and more to the most, and somehow prosperity will trickle down.

Just exactly who fought more oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?  This video tells the story:

Maxine Waters:  We do not have a crisis at Freddie Mac and in particular at Fannie Mae under the outstanding leadership of Mr. Frank Raines:

It's clear that the Republicans wanted oversight but the Democrats did not. Why in the world would we want the Democrats involved in cleaning up the mess that they created? Why should we trust anything they do now? They looked the other way when the irregularities were uncovered and blocked legislation that would have given the government more oversight of Freddie and Fannie and now we have to pay billions of dollars to fix their mess! And yet Franks and Waters will be re-elected yet again because their constituents are clueless to the mess they've made of our economy.

Senator Shelby says No

to the proposed bailout plan.  The New York Times:

Some lawmakers have made clear that they will not vote for the bailout plan under virtually any terms. “I didn’t want to be in the negotiations because I object to the basic principles of this,” said Senator Richard C. Shelby of Alabama, the senior Republican on the banking committee, who would normally be his party’s point man.

Pressed about his role, Mr. Shelby replied, “My position is ‘No.’ “

Republicans were able to get some changes into the bill which undoubtedly makes it more taxpayer friendly but the bottom line is still $700 billion.  John at Power Line recaps the changes:

So, what did the Republicans achieve? They put strings on the availability of funds beyond $250 billion, requiring fresh Congressional action for the last $350 billion. They added a requirement that Treasury establish an insurance program which would be funded by participating companies. This may be a big deal; I'm not sure exactly how it is intended to operate or how much, in the end, it will reduce the exposure to the taxpayer. They established a bipartisan oversight committee, rather than a committee run only by the Democrats, as Dodd and Frank had proposed. They took out special interest boondoggles for unions and for ACORN, the voter fraud organization. They removed a provision that would have allowed bankruptcy judges to arbitrarily reduce mortgages, an ill-conceived measure that would have aggravated a central cause of the current crisis, the difficulty of evaluating mortgage-backed securities. And they mandated a GAO study on the impact of the mark-to-market accounting rule, implicitly encouraging regulatory agencies to revise or abandon that principle, which is a key reason why banks that have little to do with the origins of the crisis are currently threatened.

The insurance approach was always central to the House Republicans' alternative to the Paulson and Frank-Dodd proposals. Whether their impact on the final product is profound, as opposed to merely helpful, depends on whether the insurance program is implemented and becomes a significant brake on taxpayer exposure.

Here's a quick definition of mark-to-market.  Some have advocated suspending mark-to-market but Republicans were only able to get a GAO study on the issue.  Several bloggers have weighed in on the impact mark-to-market accounting has had on the current crisis.  Suspension of the rule was included in The Republican Study Committee's alternative plan.  Unfortunately it didn't make the cut.

Indiana Representative Mike Pence also opposes the bailout.  Here is his letter to colleagues explaining why:

Dear Colleagues:

Our nation has been confronted by a serious crisis in our financial markets. The President and this Congress were right to act with all deliberate speed in addressing this crisis.

We now have a deal that promises to bring near-term stability to our financial turmoil, but at what price?

Economic freedom means the freedom to succeed and the freedom to fail.

The decision to give the federal government the ability to nationalize almost every bad mortgage in America interrupts this basic truth of our free market economy.

Republicans improved this bill but it remains the largest corporate bailout in American history, forever changes the relationship between government and the financial sector, and passes the cost along to the American people. I cannot support it.

Before you vote, ask yourself why you came here and vote with courage and integrity to those principles.

If you came here because you believe in limited government and the freedom of the American marketplace, vote in accordance with those convictions.

Duty is ours, outcomes belong to God.

We have fought the good fight. Now we need to finish the race and make sure that posterity and the American people know there were conservatives who opposed the leviathan state in this dark hour.

And if you do this I promise you, I will stand with you and, I believe with all my heart, the American people will stand with you as well.

MIKE PENCE

My personal feeling is that nothing good will come from this.  Many of those responsible for this mess are the same ones crafting the bill to get us out of it.  Texas Rainmaker takes us on a little trip down memory lane:

Let’s just take stroll down memory lane and see who was doing what in Washington, oh say, about 5 years ago….

September 11, 2003
New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.
…
Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.

TR has much more.  Be sure to read it all and click the links.  Democrats are "talking up" accountability in the bailout plan:

Senator Dodd said discussions were closer in finalising a deal.

''We're very much in the process to get that, but it's not done, we're not there I tell you that, but we're getting there,'' he said.

Some of the issues making headway in the plan discussions included ''oversight, transparency, accountability, executive compensation'', Senator Dodd said.

Where is their accountability?  Senator Dodd?

But we now know that many of the senators who protected Fannie and Freddie, including Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Christopher Dodd, have received mind-boggling levels of financial support from them over the years.    

Throughout his political career, Obama has gotten more than $125,000 in campaign contributions from employees and political action committees of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, second only to Dodd, the Senate Banking Committee chairman, who received more than $165,000.           

Clinton, the 12th-ranked recipient of Fannie and Freddie PAC and employee contributions, has received more than $75,000 from the two enterprises and their employees. The private profit found its way back to the senators who killed the fix.    

There has been a lot of talk about who is to blame for this crisis. A look back at the story of 2005 makes the answer pretty clear.           

Oh, and there is one little footnote to the story that's worth keeping in mind while Democrats point fingers between now and Nov. 4: Senator John McCain was one of the three cosponsors of S.190, the bill that would have averted this mess.    

Voters have a golden opportunity to avert another mess. 

McCain/Palin 2008.

Democrats...In their own words

NakedEmperorNews

Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis.

At a 2004 hearing see Democrat after Democrat covering up and attacking the regulations to protect Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (their Cash Cows) that are now destroying our economy because the Democrats let them cheat.

McCain and the Republicans tried to stop it over and over again.

McCain/Palin 2008.  Otherwise we'll be in much worse shape than we are now.  Count on it.

Alcee Hastings: Sarah Palin a threat to Jews and Blacks

Where is Barack Obama's condemnation of this statement by Florida Representative Alcee Hastings?:

“Anybody toting guns and stripping moose don’t care too much about what they do with Jews and blacks. So, you just think this through,” Hastings added...

Hastings was speaking before a group of Jewish and African-American Democrats and they erupted in laughter and applause at his words.  Jennifer Rubin:

If there were ever time for Barack Obama to show some leadership on race and religion this is it. Will he condemn the comment and banish Hastings from any campaign role? It is time to step up to the plate.

I've been unable to find any reaction by Obama to Hastings's outrageous comments. 

Hillary Clinton's "great friend" also had a few words for her supporters:  She lost.  Get over it.

Sister Toldjah notes that Tennessee Rep. Steven Cohen, who was on the panel with Hastings, recently compared Palin to Pontias Pilate:

I should also note that that Steve Cohen mentioned in the CNN article is the same one who said the following on the House floor last week about Senator Obama and Gov. Palin:

“Barack Obama was a community organizer like Jesus…Pontias Pilate was a governor.”

"Where's the outrage?"  There will be no outrage.  These are Democrats after all. 

Gateway Pundit:

Let's face it.
There is no way a Republican could say anything this foul and still have a career.
Then again... There aren't any impeached Republican judges currently serving in the US House.

Lest we forget:

For those not aware, Alcee AssStings “was appointed to the federal bench in 1979 by President Jimmy Carter” until he was impeached by the House of Representatives by a narrow margin of 413-3. Sadly, “the terms of his conviction did not bar him from holding a future public office.”

“[Hastings was] given a full pardon by Bill Clinton on his last day in office.”

 

Catholic Voters...Vote your Conscience

CatholicVote.com:   

(Via Hot Air)

Obama, Axelrod and disappearing YouTube videos

***Updates below***

The Jawa Report has posted an incredibly detailed article on the smear campaign against Sarah Palin:

Extensive research was conducted by the Jawa Report to determine the source of smears directed toward Republican Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin. Those smears included false allegations that she belonged to a secessionist political party and that she has radical anti-American views.

Our research suggests that a subdivision of one of the largest public relations firms in the world most likely started and promulgated rumors about Sarah Palin that were known to be false. These rumors were spread in a surreptitious manner to avoid exposure.

It is also likely that the PR firm was paid by outside sources to run the smear campaign. While not conclusive, evidence suggests a link to the Barack Obama campaign.  Namely:

* Evidence suggests that a YouTube video with false claims about Palin was uploaded and promoted by members of a professional PR firm.

* The family that runs the PR firm has extensive ties to the Democratic Party, the netroots, and are staunch Obama supporters.

* Evidence suggests that the firm engaged in a concerted effort to distribute the video in such a way that it would appear to have gone viral on its own. Yet this effort took place on company time.

* Evidence suggests that these distribution efforts included actions by at least one employee of the firm who is unconnected with the family running the company.

* The voice-over artist used in this supposedly amateur video is a professional.

* This same voice-over artist has worked extensively with David Axelrod’s firm, which has a history of engaging in phony grassroots efforts, otherwise known as “astroturfing.”

* David Axelrod is Barack Obama’s chief media strategist.

* The same voice-over artist has worked directly for the Barack Obama campaign.

This suggests that false rumors and outright lies about Sarah Palin and John McCain being spread on the internet are being orchestrated by political partisans and are not an organic grassroots phenomenon led by the left wing fringe.

The evidence is compelling.  And seems to be confirmed by the disappearing You Tube videos and accounts which are the basis for Rusty's claims.  Ace, from Ace of Spades HQ, who assisted the Jawa Report in compiling the story:

I would once again stress that this is the best confirmation of everything Rusty alleged... and the stuff he didn't quite allege but we're all thinking is most likely true.

"eswinner" is not sitting at the computer watching right-wing blogs post stories.

"eswinner" does not have a staff vigilantly monitoring the internet for damaging stories.

Neither, for that matter, does Winner & Associates.

But the Barack Obama campaign, headed up by David Astroturf, does.

Who directed eswinner to close his account?:

Barack Obama and the DNC watch this blog. And I've put them on notice since this afternoon that a story about them was coming.

Within an hour of the story being posted, the videos began coming down.  Within 90 minutes they were all down.

That's a pretty fast response time.  I didn't mention Winner & Associates in my hints.  So why would they be on notice?

I only mentioned Axelrod and Obama.

No, I do not believe that a random Winner & Associates employee just happened to be reading the Ace of Spades website and suddenly came across a link to a story about them and then decided to wake the bosses over it.

I believe the Obama campaign and the DNC have been watching since this afternoon.  And they put the call into "eswinner" to get those videos down and bury the evidence.

And now "eswinner" has decided to end his short career on YouTube, despite the fact that this was his Best.  Day.  Eveehhhhh.

Sounds about right.  Bloggers are all over this story, I don't believe the mainstream media can ignore it.  Obama and Axelrod are well-versed in the "dark arts" of Chicago politics and this smear campaign is just one example.  This story won't matter to left-wing, die-hard Obama fans.  It should matter to the rest of us.

Here is the video in question.  A "quick-thinking watchdog" captured and reposted it on YouTube.  I think Michelle Malkin is right: 

I highly doubt “eswinner” will dare to send a takedown notice and reveal himself — and the lawyers and money behind him.

The New York Times was shown as the source for the claim that Sarah Palin was a member of the Alaskan Independence party.  Here is the correction from the Times:

An article on Tuesday about concerns over Senator John McCain’s background check of Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska, his choice of running mate, misstated the history of her political party affiliation. As The Times has since reported, she has been a registered Republican since 1982; she was not for a couple of years in the 1990s a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, which advocates a vote on whether her state should secede.

Patterico:  The Cover-Up Begins:

Shortly after Rusty’s post appeared, the video and related YouTube videos started coming down. Winner’s YouTube profile, that of his father, and several others were closed. This began happening within an hour of the posting of Rusty’s post. Michelle Malkin has the entertaining details, complete with screenshots.

In the criminal law business, we call evidence like that “consciousness of guilt.”

There needs to be follow-up to this story. The connection to the Winners and their PR firm is solid. The evidence tying in Axelrod and Obama is circumstantial but suggestive. The lightning-quick cover-up goes a long way towards convincing me. Now the baton needs to be passed to a media organization that can demand answers from the parties involved, who are unlikely to respond to a bunch of bloggers.

Bueller?  Bueller?

***Update 8:17 PM CT***

Ethan Winner admits he produced the video but claims he's paying for it and he found the voice over artist through a talent agency:

The idea for the video was mine. No one paid me to produce it. The only out-of-pocket cost will be the fee for the voice-over narrator, which I will pay personally when I receive an invoice. Contrary to the allegation in the Jawa Report, the voice-over artist has never done any work for the Obama campaign. I retained her through a talent agency based solely on the quality of her voice.

Oh really?:

Winner's complete response can be read at the above link.  Ace had a little fun with the salutation and postscript, and adds:

As Commenters Point Out... How is it, exactly, that Ethan Winner found out his homemade, handcrafted, completely DIY video had become the center of internet attention a mere ten minutes after My Pet Jawa posted his article?

Is Ethan Winner, dyed in the wool Democrat, claiming he's a My Pet Jawa fan?

Or an Ace of Spades fan?

If so, why won't he return my emails or phone calls?  Dude -- if you're a fan, I totally want to hang with you!  We can totally drinks some beers and spread some smears.

You pay for the hookers, of course.  You're the rich guy who pays actors to fancy-up his DIY YouTube videos.

And Dude...  I guess you're just the unluckiest DIY YouTube video free speech enthusiast alive, given that your voice-over woman sounds exactly like David Axelrod's.

unseen writes-- 

so let me get this straight. His family started to recieve threatening calls and emails 15 minutes after the post? That's record time for the gun carrying bitter americians from Pa. Way to be on the ball folks.

Ummmm... sure, why not.

More to come, no doubt.

On the brink

IBD Editorials:

The collapse of twin mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, along with the failures of Lehman Bros., Bear Stearns and insurer AIG, expose taxpayers to more than $1 trillion in liabilities.

Democrats are furiously pointing their fingers at Republicans - specifically President Bush and Senator John McCain:

When House Speaker Nancy Pelosi recently barked "no" at reporters for daring to ask if Democrats deserved any blame for the meltdown, you saw denial in action.

Pelosi and her followers would have you believe this all happened because of President Bush and his loyal Senate lapdog, John McCain. Or that big, bad predatory Wall Street banks deserve all the blame.

"The American people are not protected from the risk-taking and the greed of these financial institutions," Pelosi said recently, as she vowed congressional hearings.

Only one problem: It's untrue.

Oh, dear.  More hearings.  I hope she calls Massachusetts Democrat Barney Frank to testify:

...the fact is, President Bush in 2003 tried desperately to stop Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from metastasizing into the problem they have since become.

Here's the lead of a New York Times story on Sept. 11, 2003: "The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago."

Bush tried to act. Who stopped him? Congress, especially Democrats with their deep financial and patronage ties to the two government-sponsored enterprises, Fannie and Freddie.

"These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis," said Rep. Barney Frank, then ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. "The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."

[...]

As for presidential contender John McCain, just two years after Bush's plan, McCain also called for badly needed reforms to prevent a crisis like the one we're now in.

"If Congress does not act," McCain said in 2005, "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."

And McCain was right.  Barack Obama, however, claims McCain was asleep at the wheel while he, Obama, was warning of eminent danger.  Even the Washington Post called him on his deception:

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."
[...]

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 isn't churlish to point out the facts.  This little chart presents a few more facts:

Not just friends, but family:

Gateway Pundit has a list of attempts by President Bush to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  President Bush called for reform 17 times in 2008 alone.

Mark Levin wishes there were Republicans in Congress as smart as he is.  So do I.

***Update 9:38 PM CT***

Neal Boortz with The Rest of the Meltdown Story:

Fear not. I’m here to help. I know … I’m just another talk show host; but the fact is that when the stage was being set for the problems we’re seeing today I was making most of my money as a real estate lawyer .. closing loans for some of the very institutions that are the tank today. This rather unique combination – closing lawyer and radio talk show host – gave me a front row seat to the politicization of mortgage loans that led us to today’s headlines.

Barack Obama's "Still" ad

Barack Obama's attempt to portray John McCain as an old, out of touch Washington dinosaur turns into another major gaffe. 

Jonah Goldberg:

Yep. The day after 9/11, as part of its "get tough" makeover, the Obama campaign is mocking John McCain for not using a computer, without caring why he doesn't use a computer. From the AP story about the computer illiterate ad:

"Our economy wouldn't survive without the Internet, and cyber-security continues to represent one our most serious national security threats," [Obama spokesman Dan] Pfeiffer said. "It's extraordinary that someone who wants to be our president and our commander in chief doesn't know how to send an e-mail."

This must be one of the "big issues" Obama campaign manager David Plouffe was talking about:

"We will respond with speed and ferocity to John McCain's attacks and we will take the fight to him, but we will do it on the big issues that matter to the American people," such as the economy, healthcare, and energy.

Hmmmm....where's the part about the vital importance of our commander-in-chief knowing how to send an email?  He forgot to mention it.  Thankfully the campaign addressed this glaring omission in the "Still" ad.

I guess the Obama campaign is targeting young voters with this loser ad, I don't know who else would care about it one way or another.  But what's really extraordinary is that some genius(es) on the Obama team made a conscious decision to run the ad without doing any research on the matter.  Here's a little info Obama's team could have used - and easily found using the Internet - from Forbes Magazine:

In certain ways, McCain was a natural Web candidate. Chairman of the Senate Telecommunications Subcommittee and regarded as the U.S. Senate's savviest technologist, McCain is an inveterate devotee of email. His nightly ritual is to read his email together with his wife, Cindy. The injuries he incurred as a Vietnam POW make it painful for McCain to type. Instead, he dictates responses that his wife types on a laptop. "She's a whiz on the keyboard, and I'm so laborious," McCain admits.

Via Ace, who notes McCain is probably not so hot on the basketball court either:

McCain also can't play basketball very well,  Obama.  How 'bout you challenge him to a game of one-on-one, too?

This is important:

What you are now seeing is Obama's performance in a crisis challenging situation.

Are you reassured?  Are you looking forward to the cool judgment and steady wisdom of President Barack Obama in a true crisis?

The misjudgment to lead. 

Beltway Snark:

Hey Obama, aren’t you the asshat who screwed up sending out a damn text message?

I do believe he was. 

Gabriel Malor, posting at Ace of Spades HQ:

As strange as it may be to imagine, there are Americans who don't use email, many who use it rarely, and many who don't like it. Implying that they are stuck in the '80s does not seem like a smart move. A lot of these folks are sensitive to being called "out of date" or "out of touch."

What starts as an attack on John McCain--"he can't use a computer"--sounds a lot like an attack on everyone who doesn't. As Allah says, that's a lot of seniors. But not just seniors. It's a personal attack on anyone who doesn't switch on their computers right after they switch on their coffeemakers.

Sure, it squeezes in an attempt at a substantive issue--"he doesn't understand the economy"--but the gist of the whole ad is that McCain is old and old things aren't cool. That's what the shot of the brick cellphone and the rubix cube are all about. But something that Obama obviously didn't consider is that old people hold grudges, especially when some half-grown dandy spits in their faces.

Obama keeps complaining that he is portrayed as a sneering, snobbish elite. Rhetorical question: I wonder why that is?

Rhetorical answer:  Because we're all a bunch of racists?:

Enough.  Your racism is showing...

And we're afraid of the dark...and it's LOL funny:

...You are demonstrating a form of self-hatred...all black people are not bad...have hope...wake up...don't be afraid of the dark...lol

(Personal note to IM Awake, this racist voted for Alan Keyes in the 1996 Republican primary.  Now, please go to sleep).

John Hinderaker:

Obama Gets Tough, Shoots Self In Head 

Now that's LOL!  Moreso because it's true.  (I mean that figuratively of course.  Just needed to disclose that in case IM is still Awake).