2008 Presidental Election: Obama v McCain

Boygabriel wrote: Tracking McCain's lies. 51 and counting.

I'm still waiting for that Obama favoritism in the media to shine a spotlight on the more major of these lies.

Boygabriel wrote: [quote=daver][quote=Boygabriel]Tracking McCain's lies. 51 and counting.

I'm still waiting for that Obama favoritism in the media to shine a spotlight on the more major of these lies.

Boygabriel wrote: McCain advisor claims McCain helped create the Blackberry.

daver wrote: I suppose that they can argue that McCain's opposition to telecomm taxes helped create the current telecomm industry as it is. I certainly wouldn't call him _responsible_ for it, though. And were I _to_ call him responsible for it, I would instead characterize it as pro-big business instead of pro telecomm. Were it me.

daver wrote: A look at the data (top of the Wash. article) would say that people are inclined to believe data that backs up their already held viewpoint, and that refutation of such data does not have a ginormous effect upon them.

Lynn Forester de Rothschild, a prominent Hillary Clinton supporter and member of the Democratic National Committee’s Platform Committee, will endorse John McCain for president on Wednesday, her spokesman tells CNN.

Forester was a major donor for Clinton earning her the title as a Hillraiser for helping to raise at least $100,000 for the New York Democratic senator’s failed presidential bid.

Carnivore wrote: I agree that the studies show that all people tend to be influenced primarily by information that confirms their beliefs. However, the study showed that Democrats' opinions reversed when shown the refutation of a lie, although not back to baseline. However, the Republicans in the study showed a strengthening of their belief despite the refutation. Also, the Roberts and detainee questions were different, in that there are other reasons for Democrats to disapprove of detainee treatment or of Roberts other than the lie refuted. "Disapproval" is a vague parameter. On the other hand, the question the Republicans were asked in the article showed that they continued to believe the specific lie (such as "tax cuts increase general revenue") even after it was refuted, not just express a vague disapproval. Now it may be due to the design of the study, but the article showed that many Republicans continue to believe a lie after it is refuted, and may even believe it more fervently after refutation. It did not show that about Democrats.

Boygabriel wrote: From the Straight Talk Express:

McCain, today:

Two years ago, I warned that the oversight of Fannie and Freddie was terrible, that we were facing a crisis because of it, or certainly serious problems," Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., told CBS this morning. "The influence that Fannie and Freddie had in the inside the Beltway, old boy network, which led to this kind of corruption is unacceptable and I warned about it a couple of years ago.

McCain 10 months ago:

But so, in this whole new derivative stuff, and SIBs and all of this kind of new ways of packaging mortgages together and all that is something that frankly I don’t know a lot about. [...]

But I don’t know of hardly anybody, with the exception of a handful, that said ‘wait a minute, this thing is getting completely out of hand and is overheating.'

So, I’d like to tell you that I did anticipate it, but I have to give you straight talk, I did not.

- ABC News

McCain, May 26, 2006 wrote: 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.

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.

I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. 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.

I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.