SDR i wish people cared enough to actually discuss issues. I wish Obama's challenge was as simple as what you describe, because i feel he faces a much more difficult challenge. A voting public who is poorly informed. Fed by sound bites. Too lazy to find their own information. Too easily swung by every day chatter. And too quick to believe ANYONE who fancies them self an authority on ANYTHING.
Ironically, the best point ive seen Obama make lately was on Letterman the other night when he stated that he picked Biden as his running mate because he felt Biden offered him views he might not have, ideas he may not come up with, and counsel he might not get anywhere else. Simply discussing THE REAL PURPOSE OF A VP, implies (correctly in my mind) that Palin's pick is pure political maneuvering.
Saddest part is no one cares. I honestly feel that even though Obama is winning in many key states, and would likely win an election held today... he is losing ground every day. The dems have to find some way to counter act this pathetic Republican strategy. I wish it was as easy as shouting "WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE!"
Thanks, letdown -- I'm sure you're right. And it's certainly not the time to rearrange the deck chairs of policy minutia, while the ship is trying to negotiate the shoals. Hang on, folks, it's going to get rough. . .
I agree, to clarify, I wasn't being dismissive of your point SDR, just that a huge problem with both party is that party members listen only to their side and completely shout out the other party completely. It has probably been this way for a long time, but I've become especially aware of it lately. There is an overwhelming sense that the opposite party, by definition, is wrong on every issue, and as a result, no one is willing to consider alternatives.
And that's where Obama stands apart, apparently willing, on a regular basis, to credit an opponent with certain strengths and attributes, and to present a nuanced position himself on one issue or another. Can we assume that he intends to present a good example in this regard, and hopes to inspire a similar response from others ? Or is he just a fool ?
And, should the gloves come off ? I'm talking with small-town Dems who say "hit them like they hit us". . .
I think it is a combination of wanting to set a good example but also of believing in it. Neither party (or ideology if you prefer) has a monopoly on the correct or right way to settle all issues. In "The Audacity of Hope" he has a great section about how in the senate everyone arrives and runs their business seperately and often wind up talking to a near empty room, that "In the world's greatest deliberative body, no one is listening"
We come from small towns, and the big city lights. We are wives, husbands, mothers and fathers. We are daughters, sons, and the entire extended family that gives support during deployments. Our backgrounds may be diverse, but we are united in the cause of service to our country.
I now see that Obama is almost the ideal candidate for this moment in American history. I disagree with him on many issues. But those don’t matter as much as what Obama offers, which is a deeply conservative view of the world. Nobody can read Obama’s books (which, it is worth noting, he wrote himself) or listen to him speak without realizing that this is a thoughtful, pragmatic, and prudent man. It gives me comfort just to think that after eight years of George W. Bush we will have a president who has actually read the Federalist Papers.
Most important, Obama will be a realist. I doubt he will taunt Russia, as McCain has, at the very moment when our national interest requires it as an ally. The crucial distinction in my mind is that, unlike John McCain, I am convinced he will not impulsively take us into another war unless American national interests are directly threatened.
“Every great cause,” Eric Hoffer wrote, “begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.” As a cause, conservatism may be dead. But as a stance, as a way of making judgments in a complex and difficult world, I believe it is very much alive in the instincts and predispositions of a liberal named Barack Obama.
This is just a summary of key points of what's already on his website, but at least he's presenting some real course of action here to the public. IMHO, Obama should broadcast this on national television and send the summary of his economic proposals to national newspapers so they can respond to his policies...
Shift the debate to the issues rather than the distractions.
i know i am a Kool-Aid drinker of the first magnitude, but how can you claim to be figure that works across the aisle in a bi-partisan fashion, yet not even look your opponent, once in a critical debate?
McCain did not look good, his "Bob Hope" eyes looked real bad.
Oh, and i must disagree with Obama, missile defense is a waste of time and money and only exacerbates tensions with Russia.
Obama presented a more tempered and presidential appearance, that suggested a forward direction in foreign policy, McCain clung to his 20th century vision in a 21st century world - back assward.
i hear you beta. even at the end of the debate when the two candidates shook hands, mccain still could not look obama in the eye. not a sign of a man i could trust.
and there is definitely something up with his left eye
Agreed.... SDI should have been Obama's answer to the first question of the debate. (Which programs would you eliminate to help pay for the Wall Street bailout?)
Still, Obama did well. He held his own, looked presidential, and didn't make any huge gaffes. That's all he really needed to do. McCain came across as a bitter old man when he needed to deliver a knockout punch.
And yeah, McCain's left eye scares the hell out of me... Looks almost like he had a mild stoke, or that he's dealing with a brain tumor. God forbid we somehow end up with Palin in the Oval Office... Hopefully Obama/Biden will win this thing, and Caribou Barbie will be sent back to Alaska.
While the Lehrer News Hour seems to make every effort to appear neutral (I watch the program regularly), their profiles of the two candidates, this week, was surprisingly lopsided. In the two segments devoted to their respective decision-making styles, McCain was portrayed as impulsive, even reckless -- note was taken of the personality profile of the typical military fighter pilot, and certainly go-it-alone -- while Obama was credited with the habit of listening to all sides, among his advisors and colleagues, before making a decision. Both candidates were said to "not look back" on decisions made -- but McCain was quoted thus: "Sure, I've made mistakes, but I've learned to live with the consequences." I wonder if the nation should be expected to live with his mistakes, too. . .and what they'll be, if he is elected.
Profiles aside, in the debate, we saw the strong contrast in the styles of these two candidates, in how they would engage opponents and answer tough challenges.
Obama looked Presidential. He was confident, non-confrontational, looked his opponent straight in the eyes and was able to agree on points, and disagree on others. McCain on the other hand seemed childish like a grumpy old man, never looked his opponent in the eyes, twisted his opponents words, & kept taking cheap shots. "Scrappy" is not strong... I do think that part of this can be attributed to nervousness which made him scrappy.
But using a person’s first name and looking at them when speaking is much more respectful than calling them by title "Senator" and refusing to look at them. IMHO this debate was very telling of the character and style of diplomacy that these two men would bring to the Presidency. Barack was smart and respectful, able to look John McCain in the eye, agree and disagree without being confrontational. This is what we need in a President, somebody able to enagage in strong, mature, and intelligent diplomacy.
Why is it so broadly assumed that a Hero is an ideal figure to lead ? And why is it thought that someone who has suffered, and survived, is, by definition, a Hero ?
Why don't we consider an imprisoned and tortured military veteran as -- not to put it too delicately -- damaged goods ?
A man who, before his life-changing imprisonment, was an under-educated and, some would say, roguish fighter pilot -- a group characterized by their impulsive daring and prone to last-second decision-making, it is said -- who became a born-again patriot and, incidentally, meddled with the process of identifying his fellow missing-in-action servicemen, following the conclusion of the Vietnam War, and who apparently holds the belief that it was a "just war" that America refused to prosecute to a "successful conclusion" -- is now thought of as an appropriate leader in a (once again) war-addled America ?
Shouldn't such persons be treated with respect -- but definitely be kept out of the decision-making process in Washington, specifically because of their history ? Should the warriors be given the keys to the ammo dump ?
Haven't we had our fill of military hawks, in the seats of power ? Is the fear-mongering never to stop ?
fuck obama. fuck mccain. fuck them all. they are all lying jackasses. americans are easily persuaded. this is no democracy. our country is being run by children with guns. wake up.
Poll: Obama Up By Four Points Nationally
By Eric Kleefeld - September 30, 2008, 10:19PM
The new ABC/Washington Post poll shows Barack Obama leading John McCain 50%-46%, with a ±3% margin of error.
For now at least, the election is really coming down to the economy. Obama leads 50%-43% on handling the economy, and leads 50%-40% on handling the current financial crisis. McCain wins on foreign policy questions, but security doesn't seem to be enough to get him into the lead.
On the one hand, this poll does seem to vindicate the McCain campaign's contention that last week's ABC/WaPo survey was an outlier when it had Obama leading 52%-43% among likely voters. On the other hand, Obama is still ahead -- and it doesn't speak well of the McCain campaign's confidence that they felt the need to hold a conference call with reporters and aggressively debunk an outlying poll.
"A local newspaper columnist, in a spoof of Obama’s platform, wrote in one recent piece that the Democrat would hire the rapper Ludacris to paint the White House black (a reference to a pro-Obama song by Ludacris), and divert more foreign aid to Africa so "the Obama family there can skim enough to allow them to free their goats and live the American Dream." He joked that Obama would replace the 50 stars on the U.S. flag "with a star and crescent logo," an Islamic symbol, and that his policy on drugs would be to "raise taxes to pay for Obama's inner-city political base."
The columnist, Bobby May, is also treasurer of the Buchanan County Republican Party and was listed in a July news release as the county's representative on McCain's Virginia leadership team, though he said his column reflected his views alone, and he denied it was racist."
Obama's letter dated 22 March 2007 to Secretary Paulson and Ben Bernanke:
Dear Chairman Bernanke and Secretary Paulson,
There is grave concern in low-income communities about a potential coming wave of foreclosures. Because regulators are partly responsible for creating the environment that is leading to rising rates of home foreclosure in the subprime mortgage market, I urge you immediately to convene a homeownership preservation summit with leading mortgage lenders, investors, loan servicing organizations, consumer advocates, federal regulators and housing-related agencies to assess options for private sector responses to the challenge.
We cannot sit on the sidelines while increasing numbers of American families face the risk of losing their homes.
And while neither the government nor the private sector acting alone is capable of quickly balancing the important interests in widespread access to credit and responsible lending, both must act and act quickly.
Working together, the relevant private sector entities and regulators may be best positioned for quick and targeted responses to mitigate the danger. Rampant foreclosures are in nobody's interest, and I believe this is a case where all responsible industry players can share the objective of eliminating deceptive or abusive practices, preserving homeownership, and stabilizing housing markets.
The summit should consider best practice loan marketing, underwriting, and origination practices consistent with the recent (and overdue) regulators' Proposed Statement on Subprime Mortgage Lending. The summit participants should also evaluate options for independent loan counseling, voluntary loan restructuring, limited forbearance, and other possible workout strategies. I would also urge you to facilitate a serious conversation about the following:
* What standards investors should require of lenders, particularly with regard to verification of income and assets and the underwriting of borrowers based on fully indexed and fully amortized rates.
* How to facilitate and encourage appropriate intervention by loan servicing companies at the earliest signs of borrower difficulty.
* How to support independent community-based-organizations to provide counseling and work-out services to prevent foreclosure and preserve homeownership where practical.
* How to provide more effective information disclosure and financial education to ensure that borrowers are treated fairly and that deception is never a source of competitive advantage.
* How to adopt principles of fair competition that promote affordability, transparency, non-discrimination, genuine consumer value, and competitive returns.
* How to ensure adequate liquidity across all mortgage markets without exacerbating consumer and housing market vulnerability.
Of course, the adoption of voluntary industry reforms will not preempt government action to crack down on predatory lending practices, or to style new restrictions on subprime lending or short- term post-purchase interventions in certain cases. My colleagues on the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs have held important hearings on mortgage market turmoil and I expect the Committee will develop legislation.
Nevertheless, a consortium of industry-related service providers and public interest advocates may be able to bring quick and efficient relief to millions of at-risk homeowners and neighborhoods, even before Congress has had an opportunity to act. There is an opportunity here to bring different interests together in the best interests of American homeowners and the American economy. Please don't let this opportunity pass us by.
WOW! What would it be like to have a President who sees real problems coming and then takes effective action? Don't get me started...
I just heard, on NPR, Caribou Barbie saying Obama is hanging out with the Weathermen, a "domestic terrorism organization". So why did I not hear from Biden 30 seconds later that Barbie spoke to an Alaskan secessionist group as governor?!
I despise this woman. I can't even express how much.
Ugh! She married a secessionist! While there is a wide range of differences between people who have shared a board, I'm going to have to assume she is going to have a lot of overlapping opinions with her secessionist husband, given that she married him.
So I get up this morning and my Dad is here, and he has the CBS morning show on, which I never watch. Well, they are in Nashville for the debate tonight and they're broadcasting live, and they have this huge crowd of people with Obama signs behind them, which I get a kick out of. Then they acknowledge it, and say in the interest of "free speech" they are inviting John Rich out to sing his song "Raisin McCain" since he's a big Republican and McCain supporter. And the whole song it's dead quiet behind him, and he's trying to get people to sing and they are just holding up their Obama signs smiling into the camera. An older lady with an Obama sign starts dancing up next to him and she's cracking up. Then at the end of the song he says "Vote McCain! But at least vote!" and then instead of clapping for him the crowd starts chanting, "Obama! Obama! Obama!" It was so awesome!
my s.o. and i have severely opposing political viewpoints, except w/ regards to healthcare.
makes for interesting and lively debates, among other things.
the difference is, i didn't speak at the Alaskan Independence Party convention and say "I share your party’s vision of upholding the constitution of our great state."
as dull as that was, mccain looked really awkward and smarmy.
my wife and brother in law sat in somewhat disbelief at mccain's "that one" comment. we thought we heard him wrong. i spoke with my mom shortly after and she - a 63 yr old white woman - said what the hell was that about, she was pissed off.
VOTE OBAMA
Scribble, that's bullshit!
SDR i wish people cared enough to actually discuss issues. I wish Obama's challenge was as simple as what you describe, because i feel he faces a much more difficult challenge. A voting public who is poorly informed. Fed by sound bites. Too lazy to find their own information. Too easily swung by every day chatter. And too quick to believe ANYONE who fancies them self an authority on ANYTHING.
Ironically, the best point ive seen Obama make lately was on Letterman the other night when he stated that he picked Biden as his running mate because he felt Biden offered him views he might not have, ideas he may not come up with, and counsel he might not get anywhere else. Simply discussing THE REAL PURPOSE OF A VP, implies (correctly in my mind) that Palin's pick is pure political maneuvering.
Saddest part is no one cares. I honestly feel that even though Obama is winning in many key states, and would likely win an election held today... he is losing ground every day. The dems have to find some way to counter act this pathetic Republican strategy. I wish it was as easy as shouting "WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE!"
Thanks, letdown -- I'm sure you're right. And it's certainly not the time to rearrange the deck chairs of policy minutia, while the ship is trying to negotiate the shoals. Hang on, folks, it's going to get rough. . .
I agree, to clarify, I wasn't being dismissive of your point SDR, just that a huge problem with both party is that party members listen only to their side and completely shout out the other party completely. It has probably been this way for a long time, but I've become especially aware of it lately. There is an overwhelming sense that the opposite party, by definition, is wrong on every issue, and as a result, no one is willing to consider alternatives.
And that's where Obama stands apart, apparently willing, on a regular basis, to credit an opponent with certain strengths and attributes, and to present a nuanced position himself on one issue or another. Can we assume that he intends to present a good example in this regard, and hopes to inspire a similar response from others ? Or is he just a fool ?
And, should the gloves come off ? I'm talking with small-town Dems who say "hit them like they hit us". . .
I think it is a combination of wanting to set a good example but also of believing in it. Neither party (or ideology if you prefer) has a monopoly on the correct or right way to settle all issues. In "The Audacity of Hope" he has a great section about how in the senate everyone arrives and runs their business seperately and often wind up talking to a near empty room, that "In the world's greatest deliberative body, no one is listening"
so i hear Obama wants to give sex ed to kinder gardeners...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH0xzsogzAk
scribble being so new just tossed his cred at a objective person out the window. just race card bigot with no architectural skills.
| Part 2 | Part 3
| Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4
Military families for Obama:
Who are Blue Star Families for Obama?
We represent all branches of the armed services.
We come from small towns, and the big city lights. We are wives, husbands, mothers and fathers. We are daughters, sons, and the entire extended family that gives support during deployments. Our backgrounds may be diverse, but we are united in the cause of service to our country.
We are the Military Family.
http://www.bsf4o.com/
Obama and McCain (almost) all tied up again...
Average 09/05 - 09/16 McBush 45.9 - Obama 45.3 = McBush +0.6
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html
hopefully by the end of the week we will see Obama up again.
Former National Review Editor endorses Obama:
http://www.dmagazine.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?nm=Core+Pages&type=gen&mod=Core+Pages&tier=3&gid=B33A5C6E2CF04C9596A3EF81822D9F8E
I now see that Obama is almost the ideal candidate for this moment in American history. I disagree with him on many issues. But those don’t matter as much as what Obama offers, which is a deeply conservative view of the world. Nobody can read Obama’s books (which, it is worth noting, he wrote himself) or listen to him speak without realizing that this is a thoughtful, pragmatic, and prudent man. It gives me comfort just to think that after eight years of George W. Bush we will have a president who has actually read the Federalist Papers.
Most important, Obama will be a realist. I doubt he will taunt Russia, as McCain has, at the very moment when our national interest requires it as an ally. The crucial distinction in my mind is that, unlike John McCain, I am convinced he will not impulsively take us into another war unless American national interests are directly threatened.
“Every great cause,” Eric Hoffer wrote, “begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.” As a cause, conservatism may be dead. But as a stance, as a way of making judgments in a complex and difficult world, I believe it is very much alive in the instincts and predispositions of a liberal named Barack Obama.
Daily Kos has a good Analysis of the Wick Allison endorsement.
IMHO, this is the kind of campaign ad we need more of:
Obama Plan for Change Ad
It's more effective than any smoke and mirrors ad because it respects the intelligence of its audience.
This is just a summary of key points of what's already on his website, but at least he's presenting some real course of action here to the public. IMHO, Obama should broadcast this on national television and send the summary of his economic proposals to national newspapers so they can respond to his policies...
Shift the debate to the issues rather than the distractions.
i know i am a Kool-Aid drinker of the first magnitude, but how can you claim to be figure that works across the aisle in a bi-partisan fashion, yet not even look your opponent, once in a critical debate?
McCain did not look good, his "Bob Hope" eyes looked real bad.
Oh, and i must disagree with Obama, missile defense is a waste of time and money and only exacerbates tensions with Russia.
Obama presented a more tempered and presidential appearance, that suggested a forward direction in foreign policy, McCain clung to his 20th century vision in a 21st century world - back assward.
i hear you beta. even at the end of the debate when the two candidates shook hands, mccain still could not look obama in the eye. not a sign of a man i could trust.
and there is definitely something up with his left eye
Missile defense is like "lower taxes" -- it's something you have to bite your tongue and say, to get elected.
Agreed.... SDI should have been Obama's answer to the first question of the debate. (Which programs would you eliminate to help pay for the Wall Street bailout?)
Still, Obama did well. He held his own, looked presidential, and didn't make any huge gaffes. That's all he really needed to do. McCain came across as a bitter old man when he needed to deliver a knockout punch.
And yeah, McCain's left eye scares the hell out of me... Looks almost like he had a mild stoke, or that he's dealing with a brain tumor. God forbid we somehow end up with Palin in the Oval Office... Hopefully Obama/Biden will win this thing, and Caribou Barbie will be sent back to Alaska.
While the Lehrer News Hour seems to make every effort to appear neutral (I watch the program regularly), their profiles of the two candidates, this week, was surprisingly lopsided. In the two segments devoted to their respective decision-making styles, McCain was portrayed as impulsive, even reckless -- note was taken of the personality profile of the typical military fighter pilot, and certainly go-it-alone -- while Obama was credited with the habit of listening to all sides, among his advisors and colleagues, before making a decision. Both candidates were said to "not look back" on decisions made -- but McCain was quoted thus: "Sure, I've made mistakes, but I've learned to live with the consequences." I wonder if the nation should be expected to live with his mistakes, too. . .and what they'll be, if he is elected.
Profiles aside, in the debate, we saw the strong contrast in the styles of these two candidates, in how they would engage opponents and answer tough challenges.
Obama looked Presidential. He was confident, non-confrontational, looked his opponent straight in the eyes and was able to agree on points, and disagree on others. McCain on the other hand seemed childish like a grumpy old man, never looked his opponent in the eyes, twisted his opponents words, & kept taking cheap shots. "Scrappy" is not strong... I do think that part of this can be attributed to nervousness which made him scrappy.
But using a person’s first name and looking at them when speaking is much more respectful than calling them by title "Senator" and refusing to look at them. IMHO this debate was very telling of the character and style of diplomacy that these two men would bring to the Presidency. Barack was smart and respectful, able to look John McCain in the eye, agree and disagree without being confrontational. This is what we need in a President, somebody able to enagage in strong, mature, and intelligent diplomacy.
Why is it so broadly assumed that a Hero is an ideal figure to lead ? And why is it thought that someone who has suffered, and survived, is, by definition, a Hero ?
Why don't we consider an imprisoned and tortured military veteran as -- not to put it too delicately -- damaged goods ?
A man who, before his life-changing imprisonment, was an under-educated and, some would say, roguish fighter pilot -- a group characterized by their impulsive daring and prone to last-second decision-making, it is said -- who became a born-again patriot and, incidentally, meddled with the process of identifying his fellow missing-in-action servicemen, following the conclusion of the Vietnam War, and who apparently holds the belief that it was a "just war" that America refused to prosecute to a "successful conclusion" -- is now thought of as an appropriate leader in a (once again) war-addled America ?
Shouldn't such persons be treated with respect -- but definitely be kept out of the decision-making process in Washington, specifically because of their history ? Should the warriors be given the keys to the ammo dump ?
Haven't we had our fill of military hawks, in the seats of power ? Is the fear-mongering never to stop ?
fuck obama. fuck mccain. fuck them all. they are all lying jackasses. americans are easily persuaded. this is no democracy. our country is being run by children with guns. wake up.
you wanna unpack that blackharp?
Obama's up!
Poll: Obama Up By Four Points Nationally
By Eric Kleefeld - September 30, 2008, 10:19PM
The new ABC/Washington Post poll shows Barack Obama leading John McCain 50%-46%, with a ±3% margin of error.
For now at least, the election is really coming down to the economy. Obama leads 50%-43% on handling the economy, and leads 50%-40% on handling the current financial crisis. McCain wins on foreign policy questions, but security doesn't seem to be enough to get him into the lead.
On the one hand, this poll does seem to vindicate the McCain campaign's contention that last week's ABC/WaPo survey was an outlier when it had Obama leading 52%-43% among likely voters. On the other hand, Obama is still ahead -- and it doesn't speak well of the McCain campaign's confidence that they felt the need to hold a conference call with reporters and aggressively debunk an outlying poll.
7 points
it is obvious mccain would be much worse on security
so i was reading the l.a. times earlier and came across this article titled "Frank talk of Obama and race in Virginia".
"A local newspaper columnist, in a spoof of Obama’s platform, wrote in one recent piece that the Democrat would hire the rapper Ludacris to paint the White House black (a reference to a pro-Obama song by Ludacris), and divert more foreign aid to Africa so "the Obama family there can skim enough to allow them to free their goats and live the American Dream." He joked that Obama would replace the 50 stars on the U.S. flag "with a star and crescent logo," an Islamic symbol, and that his policy on drugs would be to "raise taxes to pay for Obama's inner-city political base."
The columnist, Bobby May, is also treasurer of the Buchanan County Republican Party and was listed in a July news release as the county's representative on McCain's Virginia leadership team, though he said his column reflected his views alone, and he denied it was racist."
full text of bobby may's column here (pdf)
i guess it is supposed to be a joke (maybe?) but it's not very funny at all. i can't believe any newspaper anywhere would publish such racist crap.
Obama's letter dated 22 March 2007 to Secretary Paulson and Ben Bernanke:
Dear Chairman Bernanke and Secretary Paulson,
There is grave concern in low-income communities about a potential coming wave of foreclosures. Because regulators are partly responsible for creating the environment that is leading to rising rates of home foreclosure in the subprime mortgage market, I urge you immediately to convene a homeownership preservation summit with leading mortgage lenders, investors, loan servicing organizations, consumer advocates, federal regulators and housing-related agencies to assess options for private sector responses to the challenge.
We cannot sit on the sidelines while increasing numbers of American families face the risk of losing their homes.
And while neither the government nor the private sector acting alone is capable of quickly balancing the important interests in widespread access to credit and responsible lending, both must act and act quickly.
Working together, the relevant private sector entities and regulators may be best positioned for quick and targeted responses to mitigate the danger. Rampant foreclosures are in nobody's interest, and I believe this is a case where all responsible industry players can share the objective of eliminating deceptive or abusive practices, preserving homeownership, and stabilizing housing markets.
The summit should consider best practice loan marketing, underwriting, and origination practices consistent with the recent (and overdue) regulators' Proposed Statement on Subprime Mortgage Lending. The summit participants should also evaluate options for independent loan counseling, voluntary loan restructuring, limited forbearance, and other possible workout strategies. I would also urge you to facilitate a serious conversation about the following:
* What standards investors should require of lenders, particularly with regard to verification of income and assets and the underwriting of borrowers based on fully indexed and fully amortized rates.
* How to facilitate and encourage appropriate intervention by loan servicing companies at the earliest signs of borrower difficulty.
* How to support independent community-based-organizations to provide counseling and work-out services to prevent foreclosure and preserve homeownership where practical.
* How to provide more effective information disclosure and financial education to ensure that borrowers are treated fairly and that deception is never a source of competitive advantage.
* How to adopt principles of fair competition that promote affordability, transparency, non-discrimination, genuine consumer value, and competitive returns.
* How to ensure adequate liquidity across all mortgage markets without exacerbating consumer and housing market vulnerability.
Of course, the adoption of voluntary industry reforms will not preempt government action to crack down on predatory lending practices, or to style new restrictions on subprime lending or short- term post-purchase interventions in certain cases. My colleagues on the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs have held important hearings on mortgage market turmoil and I expect the Committee will develop legislation.
Nevertheless, a consortium of industry-related service providers and public interest advocates may be able to bring quick and efficient relief to millions of at-risk homeowners and neighborhoods, even before Congress has had an opportunity to act. There is an opportunity here to bring different interests together in the best interests of American homeowners and the American economy. Please don't let this opportunity pass us by.
WOW! What would it be like to have a President who sees real problems coming and then takes effective action? Don't get me started...
I just heard, on NPR, Caribou Barbie saying Obama is hanging out with the Weathermen, a "domestic terrorism organization". So why did I not hear from Biden 30 seconds later that Barbie spoke to an Alaskan secessionist group as governor?!
I despise this woman. I can't even express how much.
who's out there working on who mccain has shaken hands with during his career?
Ugh! She married a secessionist! While there is a wide range of differences between people who have shared a board, I'm going to have to assume she is going to have a lot of overlapping opinions with her secessionist husband, given that she married him.
Today seems to be deadline to vote in many states, so register:
http://www.voteforchange.com/
and vote Obama
i will vote, for change!
right click for full size
So I get up this morning and my Dad is here, and he has the CBS morning show on, which I never watch. Well, they are in Nashville for the debate tonight and they're broadcasting live, and they have this huge crowd of people with Obama signs behind them, which I get a kick out of. Then they acknowledge it, and say in the interest of "free speech" they are inviting John Rich out to sing his song "Raisin McCain" since he's a big Republican and McCain supporter. And the whole song it's dead quiet behind him, and he's trying to get people to sing and they are just holding up their Obama signs smiling into the camera. An older lady with an Obama sign starts dancing up next to him and she's cracking up. Then at the end of the song he says "Vote McCain! But at least vote!" and then instead of clapping for him the crowd starts chanting, "Obama! Obama! Obama!" It was so awesome!
i sthrated drikning on 'may freinds' i'mf fuckinag trashedafddm mf
obmamasdm won that addebate he wiell be thea betterdf presiendent but comaes on theyer' both pathateic ughhggghnasd/fkf /fkf
crowbert,
my s.o. and i have severely opposing political viewpoints, except w/ regards to healthcare.
makes for interesting and lively debates, among other things.
the difference is, i didn't speak at the Alaskan Independence Party convention and say "I share your party’s vision of upholding the constitution of our great state."
as dull as that was, mccain looked really awkward and smarmy.
"that one"
gobama.
Vobama !
Welcome the team, Free Ramos!
my wife and brother in law sat in somewhat disbelief at mccain's "that one" comment. we thought we heard him wrong. i spoke with my mom shortly after and she - a 63 yr old white woman - said what the hell was that about, she was pissed off.
holz, if your s.o. attempted to secede from the union, would you follow?
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.