McCain is done

[Axiom_Blade]

I tell you, if Obama doesn't paint the White House black, I will be very disappointed.

 

[Pookster]

Well, I asked them, and they say he's almost stopped buying media in key markets, which was the basis for their statement. So, might be more significant to them than it really is. They also say that McCain has almost lost may retirees as he came out and said he would cut Medicare to balance the budget.

They've got to be misinterpreting the media buys. There's almost literally no way for McCain to win without Florida. No Kerry States of any significance are in play. Heck, no Kerry States are in play. Barring any changes, he has to carry every Bush State to win.

 

[Tricky]

Obama will not be president because of his advisor Franklin Raines who is a former CEO of Fannie Mae.

Are you willing to make a bet to support that position? Avatars at fourty paces?

 

[SezMe]

Obama will not be president because of his advisor Franklin Raines who is a former CEO of Fannie Mae.

This is a popular post to follow up on so I want to help out. Hey, moon, are you a sock of New Ager, the guy who promised us McCain would not get the nomination? I'll bet that the percent of voters who don't even know who Raines is much less will base there vote on that information is greater than the percent of time McCain votes with Schrub (95%).

 

[BeAChooser]

Originally Posted by moon1969
Obama will not be president because of his advisor Franklin Raines who is a former CEO of Fannie Mae.

Originally Posted by Upchurch
No, not really.

Is it cute or just sad when they desperately parrot talking points without looking into them first?

Anita Huslin of the Washington Post (hardly a source you can dismiss as right wing) wrote that Raines had “taken calls from Barack Obama’s presidential campaign seeking his advice on mortgage and housing policy matters." No one on the right made her write that in that way. So either she is a lousy reporter, was lying or Obama's campaign is lying in denying that happened. They are on record saying that they "neither sought nor received" advice from Raines "on any matter." Given the record of lies from the Obama camp so far every time they've been caught, I know where I'd place my bet in this case.

Now you cite a wikipedia article (and we all know wikipedia tends to have a liberal bias) that states "Huslin never made any claims that Raines was an Obama advisor." But no matter how you spin it ... if what she wrote is true in that original article, then Obama's campaign CALLED Raines (not the other way around) SEEKING ADVICE (like you would going to an advisor) on MORTGAGE AND HOUSING matters (which is utterly stupid given that Raines was widely known at the time to have been a corrupt democrat in the mortgage/housing arena and CEO of Fannie when they paid a record $400 million dollar civil fine for cooking the books).

Your wikipedia article also links a later WP article (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/19/AR2008091903604.html ) that said the attempts to connect Obama and Raines is "a stretch". It's rather funny that the Washington Post would publish an article saying the evidence McCain has for an Obama-Raines connection is "flimsy" when it was the Washington Post and one of their "journalists" who broke the story in the first place. Guess they didn't fact check it the first time?

Of course, now Anita has partially revised her story (I suspect she wants to keep her job at the Obama Friendly WP). Now she says Raines said he got calls from the Obama campaign on "general housing, economy issues" but not the mortgage meltdown or anything Fannie specific. This still contradicts what Raines is now claiming ... that he wasn't consulted on "housing or economic matters". This still contradicts the Obama campaign's denial that they sought his advice on any matter. So who is lying? Huslin? Raines? Obama? Has the WP fired Huslin? Again, I have to side with Huslin. In which case both Raines and Obama are now lying.

And if we again believe Huslin, is what Raines told her a denial that he was consulted like he was an advisor? NO. And the topic would still have something to do with an area in which Raines was already known to be utterly corrupt. This really doesn't help Obama. Obama's campaign was STUCK ON STUPID to have sought ANY advice (especially advice on housing and economics) from someone who was charged with essentially stealing 100 million dollars in an Enron-like scandal related to the mortgage/foreclosure arena which Obama now claims he knew was going bust year ago.

Here's another take on the Washington Post's article I linked above by Howard Kurtz trying to defend Obama in this matter:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/how_close_are_raines_and_obama.html

Howard Kurtz, the Post's media writer, said: "(Raines) has never been a close adviser to Obama." The McCain campaign never said he was. The only description in the ad of the Obama-Raines relationship is a direct quote from Ms. Huslin's story. To diminish the impact on Sen. Obama of the disclosure of an unsavory association, Mr. Dobbs and Mr. Kurtz distorted what Sen. McCain actually said.

And here's one more:

http://www.aim.org/aim-column/lying-by-media-knows-no-bounds/ "Lying By Media Knows No Bounds"

And finally, let's make sure that everyone here understands there are other connections between the Obama campaign and the people most heavily involved in the Fannie and Freddie mortgage scandals. Where there is smoke there is fire.

Jim Johnson, a long time democrat and the former CEO of failed Fannie Mae, had to have been involved in Fannie's already proven cooking of the books. He also received questionable loans from Angelo Mozilo, the CEO of failed Countrywide. And Obama had to have know that when he chose Johnson to join his campaign and help vet the VP candidates. And even after questions about this were raised and he resigned (http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/06/11/Obamas_chief_VP_vetter_resigns/UPI-36251213219865/ ), Johnson is still working as one of Obama's largest campaign contribution bundlers. Do you have a wikipedia or WP article trying to spin this one, UpChurch?

Or how about Jamie Gorelick? Remember her? She was Clinton's Deputy Attorney General in the mid-nineties who, among other things, was the author of the "wall" against sharing intelligence data between foreign and domestic agencies (which many believe partially led to 9/11). She then found her calling as Vice Chairman of Fannie Mae during the time of the fraudulent accounting (notice how all the Clinton people flocked to Fannie?). She walked away with tens of millions from Fannie. Yet Obama's campaign was apparently considering her for Attorney General if he wins the Whitehouse. (I'm sure he'd deny that now. ) In any case, Gorelick said that if she was appointed to an Obama administration, her first job would be to fix the DOJ (she thinks it is broken whereas Clinton's was not).

 

[BeAChooser]

They also say that McCain has almost lost may retirees as he came out and said he would cut Medicare to balance the budget.

Like I said, it's beggars and choosers ... and the beggars are winning.

But an economic system based on more begging than choosing is doomed to fail ... as the latest mortgage crisis proves.

 

[BenBurch]

Like I said, it's beggars and choosers ... and the beggars are winning.

But an economic system based on more begging than choosing is doomed to fail ... as the latest mortgage crisis proves.

So, we should just cancel Social Security and Medicaid and screw all those who paid into the program their whole working lives. Right?

And the old and sick; If they are going to die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population. Right?

I really hope some day you are old and sick and need the help of government to survive. And when it helps you, and you get better, that you have the humanity to be ashamed with yourself for the person you are today.

 

[Axiom_Blade]

And the old and sick; If they are going to die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population. Right?

That's what they get for being a loot---I mean, beggar.

I really hope some day you are old and sick and need the help of government to survive. And when it helps you, and you get better, that you have the humanity to be ashamed with yourself for the person you are today.

I wish it worked that way. I have members of my family who're very conservative, and have had to live off welfare, food stamps, etc. It's really weird seeing the thought processes going on there. If you ask them about it, they'll tell you they actually need it, but everybody else getting welfare is a cheat and a fraud.

I'm poor because of "bad luck" or "the system screwed me", but they're poor because they're lazy.

 

[BeAChooser]

So, we should just cancel Social Security and Medicaid and screw all those who paid into the program their whole working lives.

Who said that? I certainly didn't. And neither did McCain. Nice red herring.

And the old and sick; If they are going to die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population.

And another nice one. You must be desperate.

I really hope some day you are old and sick and need the help of government to survive.

Ah ... the *compassion* of the left. Funny that it is folks on the right who are FAR more generous in giving their own money to help those in need.

Would you like some examples?

 

[Upchurch]

Your wikipedia article also links a later WP article (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/19/AR2008091903604.html ) that said the attempts to connect Obama and Raines is "a stretch".

Yeah, that would be the same article I also referenced. The one that says that the full extent of Raines "advising" the Obama campaign entails "a couple of phone calls". I've had a couple of phone calls with several manufacturing execs. I wouldn't call myself one of their advisers.

Do you have any evidence that he has an advisory role in the Obama campaign?

 

[Dr Adequate]

Who said that? I certainly didn't. And neither did McCain. Nice red herring.

Now, BAC, how was BB or anyone else meant to guess that your whining about "beggars" had absolutely nothing to do with the post you were replying to, which was about Medicare?

 

[BeAChooser]

Yeah, that would be the same article I also referenced. The one that says that the full extent of Raines "advising" the Obama campaign entails "a couple of phone calls".

Phone calls that the Obama camp denies having made at all. So who is lying? Raines who says calls were made to him or Obama's campaign which says no calls were made for ANY advice?

And I'm sorry but the fact that Huslin is suddenly revising her account a little bit after the Washington Post apparently decided they needed to step in and save Obama, is more than suspicious.

Huslin said Raines told her that Obama's campaign called Raines TO ASK FOR ADVICE. Her latest statement leaves that part of the story in ... it just says they called for advice on "housing and the economy" (obviously trying to distance Obama from the mortgage mess). So that latest statement is still 180 degrees from what the Obama campaign is saying ... that they neither called nor were called about advice on anything. Either Obama is lying or both Raines and Huslin are lying. Now I really don't see why Huslin would lie. Do you?

I think you are just in denial, Upchurch and willing to Spin For Obama.

"Is it cute or just sad" that you do this?

 

[BeAChooser]

Now, BAC, how was BB or anyone else meant to guess that your whining about "beggars" had absolutely nothing to do with the post you were replying to, which was about Medicare?

DA, my complaint was that BB implied I (and McCain) want to abolish Social Security and Medicare. Find me a quote where I (or McCain) have said that. Otherwise, it's a red herring, as I noted. And you just failed to understand. But that lack of understanding is nothing new for democrats. Over and over they've told the public republicans wanted to cut this or cut that when all along all republicans wanted to do was slow the growth of this or that. It's the same faulty (dishonest?) logic that Obama employs when he promises he's going to cut federal taxes for "95% of working families." How could he cut the taxes of the 32% of those filing tax returns who already pay NO TAXES?

 

[Upchurch]

So, no evidence then?

 

[MattusMaximus]

Is it cute or just sad when they desperately parrot talking points without looking into them first?

At this point, I'm going to go with sad... that and pathetic

 

[Dr Adequate]

DA, my complaint was that BB implied I (and McCain) want to abolish Social Security and Medicare. Find me a quote where I (or McCain) have said that.

Your whining about beggars dooming the economy did seem to imply a certain hostility towards Medicare given that it was a reply to:

They also say that McCain has almost lost may retirees as he came out and said he would cut Medicare to balance the budget.​

 

[BenBurch]

Now, BAC, how was BB or anyone else meant to guess that your whining about "beggars" had absolutely nothing to do with the post you were replying to, which was about Medicare?

When you can change your meanings retroactively, anything is possible.

 

[BeAChooser]

Originally Posted by BeAChooser
DA, my complaint was that BB implied I (and McCain) want to abolish Social Security and Medicare. Find me a quote where I (or McCain) have said that.

Your whining about beggars dooming the economy did seem to imply a certain hostility towards Medicare given that it was a reply to:

They also say that McCain has almost lost may retirees as he came out and said he would cut Medicare to balance the budget.

You've only prove yourself are a liar, DA since that was not the statement by BA that I complained about in the post you responded to. Here's the statement by BB that I quoted before my response that you quoted in your post #91:

Originally Posted by BenBurch
So, we should just cancel Social Security and Medicaid and screw all those who paid into the program their whole working lives.

He was clearly suggesting I've recommended abolishing SS and Medicaid.

Obviously, neither he or you have been able to come up with a quote proving that. So was he just lying about my stated positions?

Now for those who want a more complete understanding, read this:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122315505846605217.html

Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Sen. McCain's senior policy adviser, . ... snip ... said the Medicare and Medicaid changes would improve the programs and eliminate fraud, but he didn't detail where the cuts would come from. "It's about giving them the benefit package that has been promised to them by law at lower cost," he said. ... snip ... Mr. Holtz-Eakin said the plan is accurately described as budget neutral because it assumes enough savings in Medicare and Medicaid spending to make up the difference. He said the savings would come from eliminating Medicare fraud and by reforming payment policies to lower the overall cost of care. He said the new tax credits will help some low-income people avoid joining Medicaid. The campaign also proposes increasing Medicare premiums for wealthier seniors.

And now a question for you, DA. How is Obama going to fund his health plan? Or is that just another lie by omission?

 

[Dr Adequate]

You've only prove yourself are a liar, DA since that was not the statement by BA that I complained about in the post you responded to. Here's the statement by BB that I quoted before my response that you quoted in your post #91:



He was clearly suggesting I've recommended abolishing SS and Medicaid.

Obviously, neither he or you have been able to come up with a quote proving that. So was he just lying about my stated positions?

Now for those who want a more complete understanding, read this:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122315505846605217.html



And now a question for you, DA. How is Obama going to fund his health plan? Or is that just another lie by omission?

Your ravings are becoming increasingly incoherent.

Start at the beginning. I posted:

Your whining about beggars dooming the economy did seem to imply a certain hostility towards Medicare given that it was a reply to:

They also say that McCain has almost lost may retirees as he came out and said he would cut Medicare to balance the budget.​

For some reason this prompted you to start screaming that I was a liar. The first step towards arguing for this would involve pointing out some sort of inaccuracy in my statement.

 

[BeAChooser]

For some reason this prompted you to start screaming that I was a liar. The first step towards arguing for this would involve pointing out some sort of inaccuracy in my statement.

Sure.

Look carefully, DA and you will see that my statement:

DA, my complaint was that BB implied I (and McCain) want to abolish Social Security and Medicare. Find me a quote where I (or McCain) have said that.

was a response to you posting this:

Now, BAC, how was BB or anyone else meant to guess that your whining about "beggars" had absolutely nothing to do with the post you were replying to, which was about Medicare?

which was your response to my statement:

Who said that? I certainly didn't. And neither did McCain. Nice red herring.

which was my response to BenBurch's statement:

So, we should just cancel Social Security and Medicaid and screw all those who paid into the program their whole working lives.

NOT a response to this BenBurch statement:

So, we should just cancel Social Security and Medicaid and screw all those who paid into the program their whole working lives.

as you clearly claimed in your post #96.

Is that chain of logic too difficult for you to follow?

Now, do you mind telling us how Obama's going to fund his health plan ... which is even bigger than McCain's?

Or is his failure to do that just another lie by omission?