New president's economic clout not assured

Exactly correct!

add a balanced budget ammendment and I think the taxpayer can take back some control!!!

Ditto

Ditto

The only president that would be able to fix this is the president that will get out of the way and let the market fix itself.Unfortunately we don't have one and we don't have one running.But the worst thing would be putting a full blown socialist in charge!

"Bad economic policymaking is really bad for the economy. " According to the article. Consider this:

The idea of Spreading the Wealth is a prime example of class-warfare. The top 5% of individuals already pay over 60% of all personal income taxes, and Obama wants to increase their tax rate by 13%, whereas the lower 50% pay less than 3% of the income taxes. And giving a "rebate" to 95% of Americans smacks of welfare since 40% of them pay NO income tax now. How do you rebate something to someone that hasn't paid it in the first place? It may buy some votes but it's bad economic policy. Here's a great post I saw a few days ago explaining how it works in practical terms.

After coming home from a certain Public School, a young boy was asked by his father what he learned at school that day. The boy said the teacher explained how "spreading the wealth" worked. She said that all students who worked hard and really studied and got A's would give some of their points to the students with F's, and the students that got B's would give points to the students with D's, so the entire class would get C's. The boy gained a whole new perspective on the issue.

Right on, welfareis just paying people to fail. If you are going to get enough money to live on whether you work or dont work who is going to choose to work? And that is exactly what we are seeing, more and more people choosing not to work and being rewarded for it. Socialism can not and does not make everyone middle class, it makes everyone except for the ruling elite low class. I am aghast by the number of people who willingly sign our country up for such a system.

What we need to do is enforce the many, many regulations already on the books, and stop the giveaway programs of Barney Frank and Cris Dodd. Stop lenders from circumventing appraisers (which is the check and balance of the system), and we would be OK. I know the popular idea is CHANGE, bu the change we may get could be worse than what we have.

Why do we keep making up new rules and regulations to replace the old rules and regulations, when the lenders are just going to find a way around whatever new check and balance is in place. As long as they are paid on a commission basis and don't get paid unless the deal closes, no amount of changed rules will make a difference. Lenders will just get craftier with their creative financing.

I left lender work 5 to 6 years ago due to the rampant fraud going on, found other clients who wanted real estimates of value, and moved on. Now business is in the toilet nationwide due to the actions and INACTION'S of Frank and Dodd. The give away of homes has got to stop, it should be based on the ability to pay, not what minority you are. Being politically correct on this issue has led to the meltdown. And it won't matter who is elected POTUS. Congress is the problem, and the more liberal it becomes, the more give aways will happen, especially when they redistribute the wealth.

Roy Wilson,
  Why for once don't you tell people the truth.  Obama is not planning on raising the taxes on the top 5% by 13% and you know it.  What Roy is doing people is adding the 10% McCain would cut them plus the 3% Obama would raise them.  This is simply another example of weapons of mass distortion used by a few of the party puppets to lie to the people.  Do you really believes this helps people? 

Roger, you do know that Obama plans to raise taxes by 25% on the top bracket and 20% on the 2nd highest tax bracket right? These would be the people already paying over half of all income taxes in the US.

Rog-I believe he was referring to the capital gains increase. It is now 15% and Obama has said he would raise it as high as 25%-28%.

I can predict what will happen. After Obama takes office (sorry, Republicans!) he'll begin to implement policies to change things...restoring oversight and regulation as defined by the start of this thread would be an excellent place to start! These things won't happen overnight, and some things will not change in the next two years leading up to the 2010 elections. Then the Republicans will begin bleating about "where's the change?" and generally bellyaching that President Obama is not doing his job.

The fact is, our country is so screwed up right now that no one will be able to fix it in the next ten years, much less two. Whoever wins the Presidency will be inheriting the biggest mess that one sitting President has ever left the poor schmoe who takes his place. Two wars that really can't be won short of killing half of the Islamic world, a financial disaster area with a $10+ trillion dollar national debt, an economy in absolute turmoil, with jobs dropping by the wayside like leaves from the trees and banks having to be propped up by the government. It's the most disorderly situation we've seen since the Great Depression.

It's probably going to take decades to clean this mess up. Our grandkids will still be paying on the national debt long after we are gone. The global economy is changing: it's going green, and computers are becoming more and more prominent. We need to change with it and not drag our feet like we have been. Electing John McCain is not going to solve anything: we have experienced the Republican philosophy of "trickle down economics", and it doesn't work! Additionally, with McCain's health a question mark -- remember, if he gets elected to two terms he'd be 80 years old by the time he's done -- the ugly spectre of having a President Palin is a possibility, and she isn't competent enough to be dog catcher, much less President of the United States!

This ain't your father's America. A job and a house isn't a given any more. Beaver Cleaver (actually, Jerry Mathers) is sixty years old. But at least we've survived the George W. Bush presidency -- barely -- and there's nowhere to go but up...  

I am shocked so many people are buying this socialist rhetoric. Go back to school and/or READ! The US government, according to the Constitution, is structured for democracy, not socialism. No one person (i.e. the President) wields enough power to create a socialist state.  Although the recent bailout/rescue plan (part government ownership of the banking system) smacks of socialism, and that was instituted by the current Republican administration.

ROY ... if you think the rich are actually paying 60% of their income in taxes, you are sadly mistaken. Any wealthy person with a savvy accountant is paying MUCH less than that. It is exactly the middle class that pays the bulk of income taxes, and to suggest that 40% of middle-class Americans pay NO income tax is ludicrous. BTW, Sarah Palin proposed giving a $1,200 "resource rebate" check to her constituents in Alaska last August due to high energy costs.  Sounds like a welfare check to me. Do some research and get your facts straight.    

McCain has said that if elected he will only serve one term. And I've heard the Beav is actually doing pretty good thank you.

I also recommend brainwashed Republicans to check out the Tax Policy Center for the facts at:

www.taxpolicycenter.org,

or the following article:

It's too bad the McCain/Palin propaganda machine appears to be working for the uneducated and right-wing evangelical folks.

you do realize that the director of the "tax policy center" is one of clinton's high ranking officials right? I do believe it is you who have fallen prey to propaganda, or at the very least aim to spread it.

A Smith ... try reading the article at:

Although I assume you are one of those who individuals who insist that everything but FOX News is a left-wing, liberal media outlet brainwashing us all. At least journalists have brains, an education, and a mandate to present both sides of an argument, Sarah Palin excluded of course.

Grandall,

Surely you jest.

A Smith, you don't think you are spreading propaganda with

If you are going to get enough money to live on whether you work or dont work who is going to choose to work? And that is exactly what we are seeing, more and more people choosing not to work and being rewarded for it.

I realize Welfare Reform is all shiny brand new--signed into law by President CLINTON, but even if you QUALIFY for welfare, you can't collect it for more than 2 years, and you have to show that you are taking all the steps you need to become EMPLOYED during that time. 

Even if you are one of those ever-fertile welfare moms and you space your offspring for maximum advantage and you QUALIFY, there is a MAXIMUM LIFE-TIME benefit period of 5 years--and you still have to be progressing toward employability in order to qualify. 

If (and you aren't exactly a reliable source) there is any rise in the welfare rolls currently it is because the economy sucks and more people are falling into true poverty and QUALIFYING for government assistance.

Yes, there was a time when welfare was actually a multi-generational, piss-poor "solution" to poverty (people who depended on it were still living in poverty), but that is not the case since welfare reform. Where have YOU been?

I bet you are still forwarding those hysterical emails I'm still getting about how the Evil Congress isn't in the Social Security system, they have that cushy Federal Pension Program that you and I can't get!!!!!!!!!!! (I'm not sure that is enough exclamation points, but I draw the line.)  When that hasn't been true since 1984...

Grandall, do you honestly think that MSNBC and CNN have given unbiased coverage of this election? If so then I must say all hope in your objectivity is lost. While in theory journalists should report the facts rather than their own personal opinions, the truth is it doesnt happen that way.

Edit, Dharma Girl, I personally know someone who is in their 40's and has lived their entire life on ssi even though they are fully able to work. Welefare reform only covers those who are deemed able to work, however it is absurdly easy to be listed as unable to work. People are more than happy to lie on forms if it means they dont have to work.

Sorry I don't.  The article is from U.S. News and World Report which essentially lays out the facts about each candidate's tax plan.  Oops...obviously another propagandist publication, right?

I have seen the income tax tables which shows Obama taxing the hell out of small businesses and McCain giving an even tax cut in terms of %. So let me ask you. Do you buy anything made by a small business? If no then sure you might have a few extra bucks coming your way. If yes then um..... did someone not tell you that all businesses pass on the cost of doing business to the end user and as such the price of eveything will be going up? Oh and dont worry about the big business either, obama plans to tax them more too.

Dharma Girl-welfare reform has made it better? Hmmmm......yesterday I was in line at the grocery store behind a women who rang up a bill of $80.66. She pulled out a wad of food stamps that totaled $80.00. She only paid 66 cents for $80 dollars worth of food. Oh....I honestly saw at least 3 boxes on twinkies in her cart.
 

Hell, with this system I wish I was poor......because then I could get the government to pay for my food and my housing (section 8). But I would first have to quit my job and default on my mortgage and other loans, so I can QUALIFY!!

Gradall - both parties have been passing socialist legislation for years. Obama started out syaing that he would tax those making over $250K. Then it was $200K. Now he is saying $150K is the threshold.

Increasing taxes on businesses will ultimately mean they will increase the prices consumers pay to offset the taxes. Therefore that is an additional tax on every consumer.

If you really want change, then vote for people who will restore the Constitution and end the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve is a private bank that is made of investor banks like Chase, Barclays, Morgan Stanley, etc.. These are the same banks both parties voted to give billions to. Our government now owns banking institutions. That is socialism. Bot parties have also given unlimited power to the Treasury Secretary.

Both McCain and Obama are members of the Council on Foreign Relations. A lot of people in politics and the media are members of the CFR. In the words of Admiral Chester Ward, Judge Advocate General of the US Navy.

"The main purpose of the Council on Foreign Relations is promoting the disarmament of U.S. sovereignty and national independence and submergence into an all powerful, one world government."

 Do your research before voting.

The economy has nothing to do with who's president, but every thing to do with the Federal Reserve.
When Carter was president, the interest rates were 18%, when Reagan 9%, Bush Senior 10%, and this country enjoyed 5 to 6% interest rates over 12 years.
I've been in real estate for over 25 years.
We use to be able to tell where interest rates were going, but now no one knows.  In the early 80's, we would watch oil prices, and if oil prices went up, the Federal Reserve, would hike the interest rates up, by 1/4 point per month.  When you hike interest rates up, less money, prices adjust.  If we had deflation 1/4 point down per month.
When Clinton, took office the Federal Reserve lowered interest rates, by 1/2 point per month untill it went to 6%.  When they did this everyone had money, and we had massive inflation, they kept it this low untill even today.
The old timers in the business, thought we would never see interest rates drop below 8%, because that would mean the fed would be giving the bank the money at 6% the banks add 2% that makes 8%.  6% would cover inflation.
During all this time interest rates have hovered around 6%, and we consumed, 5 cars per family, 10 televisions per family, televisions for are cars and even our bathrooms. Making the Chinese very rich.  We in the United States are the consumers, of the world if we dont consume, the world suffers.  But keeping the interest rates down at 5% means the fed is giving the banks the money at 3% the banks add 2% and the 3% doesnt cover inflation. 
The other problem is Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, when the banks loan money on real estate they like to see 20% down.  If you were the bank and I asked you for a loan, and put 20% down and you the bank loan me 80% of the value, then incase of forclosure, you would have a buffer of 20% for real estate fees, and fixing the property to sell.
The lenders do allow people depending on credit to do 100% financing, but to do so there is mortgage insurance that they pay in there mortgage payment, so if the lender forclosure and the lender suffers a loss, they our reimburse for the loss by the mortgage insurance.  Government mortgage insurance MIP (mortgage insurance premium), Private (Conventional Loans) PMI (private mortgage insurance).
The other problem is appraisals, in the early 80's interest rates were at 15%, so what builders did to sell there houses was pay the banks 10 to 15 points to lower the interest rates to 10% and they added the points to the price of the house.  When these people went to sell, (Job Transfrer, Etc) they found they paid to much for the house (upside down) and many people just walked and we had foreclosers and then FHA said no more seller contributions of 15% but sellers could contribute 3%, then in the 90s they start letting sellers contribute up to 10%(AmeriDream Program).
When an appraiser appraises a house they ask for the contract, and want to know the selling price, it wasnt always this way.  What the price on contract should not be shown to the appraiser, his or her job is to tell us what the property is worth what the contract price is, is irrevelant!!!
The Federal Reserve Chairman is the most powerful man in the world and the federal reserve if private not government. 
What the next President could do is clean up our Appraiser Industry.
McCain in 2005 tried to bring reform to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, check to see who stopped him.

Congratulations, A Smith, you claim to know someone who has worked the system and is fraudulently collecting SSI disability.  I will refrain from assuming that says anything about your honesty or patriotism.  Even though you apparently condone the fraud.  Or perhaps you have no clue about this person's actual medical condition.  People love to make assumptions about other people's disabilities.  But you obviously don't know what is required for someone to get on SSI disability.

Over the years I've known of 3 people who died while trying to get on SSI Disability that they easily qualified for (this is not a rarity--heart patients are at special risk, because they can be counted on to die without disability payments if they are jerked around long enough), and 1 who barely made it before he was on the street, and is trying to subsist on that now.  He has less than 30% heart function, you know the kind that is easily faked.  Lying on the forms won't get you on SSI Disability.  Your doctor telling the truth on forms may just barely get you on it if you are totally incapable of working.  I have no doubt that there is Disability Fraud, as there was, and probably still is Welfare Fraud.  But it isn't a matter of someone "choosing not to work and get paid for it" because "People are more than happy to lie on forms".  That is just not accurate.

Dharma,

If the system was not so clogged with "fraudulant" claims, those for whom the system was intended would actually be able to get the help they need.

Paul and LCS-you are both 100% correct!

independent voter, I wouldn't recommend that you try to qualify as destitute enough for food stamps by losing everything you have.  That may have looked like a great deal to you, but the man I mentioned above, with very little heart function left who barely made it onto SSI Disability in time qualifies for food stamps since his disability payments leave him living well below the poverty line.  He qualified for about $100/month, which doesn't go far in California.  We won't be supporting him for very long.

I had forgotten about food stamps--I'm not sure how they fit into welfare reform, or if they did.  But I've worked with people who qualified for them, and I didn't see anyone eating well on what was allowed.  (That was not a reference to Twinkies, although I would stick needles in my eyes before I would eat one on purpose.)

But I didn't say welfare reform has "made it better", I said it put strict limits on the amount of time someone could collect it (2 years, with a lifetime maximum of 5 years, and progress-toward-employability requirements in order to qualify for that), and cut out the multi-generational dependence on the welfare system.  It was advertised as including a safety net to insure that the truly needy would not slip through the cracks (not that that would matter to you) and there have been mixed reviews of that. 

The person I was responding to claimed that there was some stampede toward "choosing not to work and get paid for it".  Knowing how difficult Disability can be to get into before you just die, I assumed s/he was referring to welfare, which at one time some people did depend on for multiple generations--choose not to work and get paid for it.  Unless those people were defrauding the system (which I didn't personally see) they were not living well.

And I wouldn't let my dog live in the section 8 housing I have seen.  That may not be all there is (I won't assume that the example I have seen defines the system), but what I have seen was like slums.

SickNTired, I don't know what data you are basing that on, if any, so I will not comment. 

I hope I didn't leave the impression that I am a fan of any kind of benefits fraud.  Whether there is enough to "clog the system" or not, fraud is unacceptable to me.  I reported the only case where I suspected there was fraud.

I personally know someone who is in their 40's and has lived their entire life on ssi even though they are fully able to work. Welefare reform only covers those who are deemed able to work, however it is absurdly easy to be listed as unable to work. People are more than happy to lie on forms if it means they dont have to work.

That's a laugh...but I've come to expect no less from "A Smith". It's not simply a matter of lying on forms: my brother in law had a long, hard road to be able to get Social Security, and he had to do much more than simply lie on forms. It took years before something good happened for him!

Furthermore...I have first hand experience with this. In 1994 I had a stroke (coincidentally, that was 14 years ago today that that happened), followed by another a month later. I was out of work for seven months (thank goodness I had insurance to cover me and my daughter) but when I returned things didn't go so well and I accepted a voluntary layoff. The following year I applied at my local Social Security office...yes, there was a mountain of forms, but also I had to pass two screenings at doctors of their choice to prove I was disabled. These doctors know how to sniff out a faker, and it can be very difficult to prove you are disabled when you are not.

Why can't you acknowledge that the welfare system is not geared for a lifetime of handouts? That there are limits on how long a person can be on welfare? That a person must train to become employed? It must not fit your narrow view of this country.

Grandall, do you honestly think that MSNBC and CNN have given unbiased coverage of this election? If so then I must say all hope in your objectivity is lost. While in theory journalists should report the facts rather than their own personal opinions, the truth is it doesnt happen that way.

I suppose you believe that Fox News is "fair and balanced"? Sheesh... 

Dharma-I'm not saying that there are people who don't need it. However, I do refute the fact that it should be the government's job at the taxpayer's expense. Now, I don't mind paying taxes, but when you have big government coming in and telling everyone what the definition of rich is, it becomes a very dangerous precedent!

We already have government buying into banks, etc. When the money comes from government, goes to government, and is administered by government, the result will be the expansion of government. It creates a Fabian Socialistic state. Unfortunately since the Great Depression, our country has been leaning this way. What people need to understand is that this is exactly what the powers at be want! In order to get all this money, government simply does not only tax more, it also allows the Federal Reserve to create more money to loan to the government. The Fed is owned by the Private Banks. Therefore the government now answers to the Fed. What socialism does, is it strengthens the ones in power hold over the people. That includes welfare, social security, etc. And yet when the taxpayers foot the bill for all this money created out of thin air, we the taxpayers are stuck paying it all back plus interest. This is how the banks remain in control and how they keep getting richer. NOTHING CHANGES!

ROY

Yeah right. 5% of those people who benefited under Bush and will benefit under Mccain. The rest of us sucked wind for 8 years. McBush offers to make more of the middle class poor. But I would not expect people to blindly accept this as Repubs like you Roy want us to believe your spin. Check it out!

TaxCut.BarackObama.com

quad,

the securities and exchange acts of 1933 and 1934 are still intact.  if you think otherwise, point me to the legislation in either the Congressional Record or the CFR (chapter and verse please) that repealed either of those.

dal,

if you think any tax rate increase is coupled with a tax cut for anyone, check the history of the ways and means committee blue books back to 1963.  never happend.  carter told us the same thing...never materialized. 

please explain who the '5% who benefitted under bush' is, and how they benefitted. all i saw was tax revenue increase at double digit  %s after the tax rate cuts, with the top 5% now paying around 65% of all income taxes.  IRS income bulletins, as attested to by the GAO and/or CBO 

Dharma,

One estimate states that fraud and abuse cost Medicare and Medicaid about $33 billion each year. Worse, it's ridiculously easy to cheat the federal government and taxpayers out of millions of Medicare and Medicaid dollars,

http://www.ncpa.org/~ncpa/health/pdh5.html

Not to mention the millions of other types of fraud, including those perpetuated by the government etc.

qudrcps

Agree completely.

Max Truly

Socialist? What do you call the bail out of the "market" if not socialism? Please, give it a rest. The mythical "market" got us into this mess in the first place and now we have the market capitalists in govt bailing "it" out with our money. Whatever is the difference between giving taxpayer dollars to some needy family and doing the same with some needy "market" besides the amounts involved?

Whoever is elected will have his hands full. Also notice that the article says a lot will depend on how cooperative congress will be. If anything that worries me more than what a president can or cannot do. I think it's going to be up to us to bird dog those self serving idiots in congress. It's their job to legislate appropriate oversight since the "market" can't seem to regulate itself. 

We really don't need the propaganda from whatever viewpoint right now. 

DG-W,  what regulations weren't enforced the past 8 years?  cite chapter and verse of Codified Federal Register please.  it won't take 10 years to fix anything-it will take major overhaul of the CRA and NHIO so that lenders can write mortgages that make sense.  securitizing them was never an issue-that just allowed the lender to write new loans, and investors a new vehicle to invest in. it worked well for many years, and still does. neither has leveraging anything do with the meltdown- all businessses are leveraged; the degree varies by industry.  what will take time is for businesses (that would be those otherwise referred to as 'employers') to get out of the panic mode that has set in.  that's what businesses do when Congress says it 'needs to act quickly'!

grandall...in case you are not aware, tax policy center is a union funded group, headed by a clinton staffer who is on record as saying the government needs to adopt european style tax rates-which are in the 20-30% range for businesses, and 30-60% range for individuals. 

roy did not say that high income earners pay 60% of their income in taxes-there is no rate that high until you hit the death tax jackpot. what roy said was that the top 10% pay around 60% of all income taxes collected by the feds.  IRS income bulletins, at your library

What do you think about a balanced budget ammendment to reign them in?

Congress cannot fix the economy, take a lesson from the Great Depression. America was in a depression for 10 years due to the meddling of Congress. The rest of the world recovered after 4-5 years.

Government programs are going to expand, not contract. Sorry.  You know, as in a program to insure every child in America.  The biggest savings will be in cutting the military budget, which will turn us into an isolationist country.

Our permanent military bases overseas are the cheapest garrisons we have given that in almost all cases the host country is paying us to be there....... Bringing those soldiers back to the US would be therefore more costly than keeping them abroad. Unless of course your advocating we disband our military and take up the surrender first last and always mantra.

The fact of the matter is that neither candidate has any intention of cutting spending, the Democrat wants to increase spending by anywhere from 1.5 to 4 trillion dollars per year, the Republican wants to increase spending by about 300 to 600 billion dollars per year. And the reality is that the president cant cut spending even if he wanted to, that is congresses domain.

What are the odds that congress will balance the budget? lol

You hit it right on the button.  Check and see how many porkbarrel laden earmarks, pass by Obama.  McCain is at 0, which he got in trouble for from is own party, sound like a Maverick.

Soooo what do we think has been happening. Bush cut 66 social programs due to the Iraq war and now Mccain wants to freeze the government. Let me tell you guy a little secret that has been happening since the war. Your police powers and federal law enforcemetn has been trimmed to dangerous levels. I am talking terrorist smiling and waiting levels. A freeze Mccain offers will stop critical operations just like Bush has been cutting for years now. McBush will not stop there he will cut childrens programs and programs for the elderly. Yep, he already voted against many VA bills. Mccain is for big business which is why Gramm and Mccain led the charge for deregulation and our downfall. Welcome to McHell under McBush.

That would be more convincing if Senator McCain wasn't happy VOTING for his friends earmarks, unless there was more political hay to be made by pretending to be righteously indignant about the ones he didn't care about. 

As President, of course, there will be no pork that gets by his mighty pen...coming from a candidate who suggests an across the board freeze on spending while he gets down to figuring out what needs to be paid for--in the federal budget--that is just not comforting.  I actually agreed with Senator Obama's response to that "promise".  Some things aren't better handled with an ax than a scalpel. 

I expect that will be a little too subtle for you, since you are still spouting the silliest anti-Obama rhetoric you could hear from right-wing hacks, but I'm vegetarian, and hate for someone to get credit they don't deserve for avoiding pork.

Benramz2- Please, they are better equipped to handle things like this now and the economy is not the same animal as it was before...besides, we could not walk on the moon back then either...things change!

federal spending on police has been steadly rising..... I really dont see the facts supporting what you are saying there dal.

Dal:

Is that why our service members our voting for McCain 8-2.  Ill tell you why, Obama's decision to vote against the surge, would have leaved them with no reinforcement's.  After he seen the surged worked he liked the idea.  We need a president who would make the right decision, not the Wright decision!!!

Dal:

Look at the amount of Campain Contributions, 600 million Obama.  Lobbist and Big Business contributers.

The bailout was money from the Federal Reserve which we have to pay back.  The stimulas package is money we will have to pay back.  It's going to take around 10 - 15 years to boune back from this.  So, the current president will not be able to do anything about it. If people can't spend money then the ecomomy takes a hit.  Energy, oil, and tech will always thrive because people deem them as a neccesity.

LCS,

Do you ever tell the truth?

Obama has raised his money from individuals with an average doantion of $86 dollars.  WE the people relized we needed to do that to get past the entrenched Swiftboat smear machine....

Though you and others try mightily to use the same tactics as in the past, the SWIFTBOAT II is sinking this time around

Want to know the facts behind attacks and smears?  These "nonpartisan" sites are specifically for that purpose.

www.politifact.org

www.factcheck.org

www.snopes.com

Please be educated and don't fall for smears.....   Pass it on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hey Joe-the last time I saw you post, you were trying to get people kicked off the forum for lying. Hmmmm......are you voting for Obama? I would never of guessed it. By the way, I'm not voting for McCain either. To me, they are both clowns and puppets!

LCS,

  How do you know how service people are going to vote?  If you do then you should be in jail.  By the the way 8-2 is can be reduced to 4-1.  The only thing you can give us is your opinion and your credibility is sinking fast.  As far as your comment on the 600 hundred million dollars contributions to Obama coming from lobbyist and big business contributors what a crock.  They are the people trying to defeat him.  Why in the hell would they support him if he is trying to raise their taxes like you claim.  It is people like you and Joe the fake Plumber that convinced me to vote for Obama. 

tf

it's a start.

LCS

Where did you get the $600 million number from? How do you know service members are voting 8 to 2 for McC?

Carlos

your question is on point concerning congress. We need to watch them like a hawk.

For each member of congress there is 60 to 70 lobbist, that is why it is corrupt.  To get rid of these clowns, we must pass tax reform.  Certainly a flat tax across the board, would take care of it.  With a flat tax, that would get rid of 3/4s of these leeches.

These special interest groups, are there for the money, take it away, they go away.

It is these special interest groups, that are funding Obama's Election.

The fact that our service members favor McCain, should also tell you something.  Maybe the fact that they are the ones in harms way, many of them volunteering, and seeing for themselves, what we have done for the Iraqi people.  As far as WMD's they are in Syria.  I wrote a column a week ago, stating that, and yesterday they conducted a raid in Syria.  If you remember when Bush said we are going into Iraq, because of Sadam's was no cooperating with Inspections, he explained this to us for 3 months before we went in, trying to apease everyone, giving Sadam time to hide his WMD's.

Dal:

In to McCain's 2006 letter, signed by nineteen other senators--said that it was

"vitally important that Congress take the necessary steps to ensure that (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac)  operate in a safe and sound manner, and more importantly, Congress must insure that the American taxpayer is protected in the event the either... should fail."

Sen. Obama did not sign the letter, nor did any other Democrat.

In fact, not only did Senator Barack Hussein Obama not sign the letter, and although he had only three years in the Senate, he became the second largest recipient of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae campaign contributions:

A review of Federal Election Commission records back to 1989 reveals Obama in his three complete years in the Senate is the second largest recipient of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae campaign contributions, behind on Sen Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., the powerful Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. Dodd was first elected to the Senate in 1980.

Dodd recieved $165,400 in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac campaign contributions, and Obama, received $126,349 since being elected to the Senate in 2004.

Politicans have been lying for years, all of them! Politicans have been making promises for years, all of them. The problem is the American voters. We don't take the time to learn our government (Some people actually think the president has control of spending and the economy, when it is congress who has that authority). The same body of government that has a 11% approval rating, nobody challenges them. Look at the earmark problem, congress wont fix it because they all have their fingers in the pie. The only thing that will fix it is the line item veto. It's been discussed for the last twenty years, but no action. IT"S OUR OWN FAULT. We don't attend boring budget hearings or take the time to study the issues. Most people vote based on looks or rhetoric.

I have to agree Harborside about this being our own fault ... isn't that how we got "Bush the Moron" for the past 8 years?  At least Obama has been steady in his proclamation to get rid of Washington lobbyists from the get-go. And didn't McCain adopt the same talking point down the road in his own campaign?

I've heard it said that choosing among the 2 ruling parties in this country is usually a perception of the lesser of 2 evils.  It should be crystal clear that McCain's campaign has been unfocused, largely negative, and outright fraudulent at times.  I genuinely believe anyone who doesn't see that is either uneducated, hard-line Republican, or racist.  It is beyond me why anyone would want McCain/Palin anywhere near the White House.  Palin is so non-presidential it is frightening, and evidently 55% of the country feels that way. So why is this race so close?

bush got in on the fear factor and Mccain is using this same one but this time the fear is to he and some of moneyed class will have to pay their fair share,remember the story of the story of the little red hen, Who will help me, so McCain and Palin have the same song to sing,who will help me keep my hold and my wealth. stop helping them help yourselves and the rest of the country who are fighting to keep what they have worked for. stop thinking that just because they now need your vote that they what you to gain wealth no no they do not. they just want your vote to keep you just as your are no jobs no voice in the affairs of the nation thats until we send your sons and daughters off to war to fight for their interest and to protect their america, well John and Sarah it is not your america it is our america and we will stand up for the first time in a long time for all americans as someone said last night,get used to it. we the have a chance to change for the good of all, and we will be heard. Vote Obama and Vote for change not the change that John will give us but a change for all of us. 

Lets see where he got the hundreds of millions of dollars for his campaign, if he did not take special interest money.  Yes, some of it came from real people.....perhaps maybe 10%?   Not to say that McCain also did the exact thing.   Both parties are guilty of this.    Also, BOTH parties have been negative, lets not think that Obama has been any less guilty of attack ads (I have been listening to them for months).  He is also a Racist against anyone of any color that dares to ask any guestions he does not want to answer.....like Joe the Plumber    Lets not confuse the race with any facts, just empty false promised.

You know the answer to that grandall.

NVrick

Just more lies.....  Obama got ALL his money from individuals like me, with an average donation of $86 dollars

Want to know the facts behind attacks and smears?  These "nonpartisan" sites are specifically for that purpose.

www.politifact.org

www.factcheck.org

www.snopes.com

Please be educated and don't fall for smears.....   Pass it on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

joe,

the nyt has reported that there are millions of dollars in donations for obambam with foreign addresses on the credit card receipt.  illegal, no matter how you slice and dice.

Silly Repuke moron!  If McCain happened to croak, how much does anyone know about Palin? Joe The Plumber probably would be a better choice for VP than Palin.  Obama is not banging on the economy anymore than McCain. In this case, they are both correct! The economy is in a shambles and has been mismanaged, period!

TJM07,

  Obama's lead in the polls is a reflection of what we KNOW  happened under Bush.  People are afraid of McCain's judgement and tired of his negative campaign that had nothing to do with the issues.  Very similar to you post. 

Actually, Obama's lead can be attributed to the media coverage and the Bias in the machine. Both of them have similar plans, both have sided with Bush when the situation warranted the backing but the media seems to think Barack Obama is the answer. Could it be because of Holywood, Oprah and those gullible enough to believe he can part the red sea?

it always cracks me up when repulicans refer to hollywood when talking about Democratic candidates. Thye are the party that elected an actor into the presidency, you know the one who came up with trickle down economics? which by the way has failed miserably, hence the mess we are in now. Neither candidate will be able to reverse the economic woes our country faces in the coming years, in a four year term. We have indebted ourselves to far. Vote all whe passed the bailout out of office.

Obama 2008 (only cause my candidate asked me too)

Kucinich/paul 2012!

Actually Reaganomics worked pretty good. Sure a lot better than Jimmy Carters, but then your probably too young  or to senile to remember that.

An actor whose campaign promise to balance the budget within three years turned into an explanation that it was harder than it looked--and deficit spending that took the deficit from $700 billion into $3 trillion dollars during his two-term presidency.  And they still worship him.  Why do I have the feeling they will hold President Obama to a much higher standard?  Hmm...

well stated Dharma. but remeber Repulicans only see what they want to see. Reality is not their forte!

Please explain how Trickle Up Economics (Wealth Redistribution) will work. We know that Trickle down Economics works as the un-employment rate went down during Reagan term of office.

If you are actually worried about the deficit then how can you possibly vote obama who plans to increase spending by trillions of dollars per year?

Frankly I think it was worth 2.3 trillion dollars to defeat the USSR, and I really dont care if some unappreciative naive fool thinks that this was wasteful.

Carter was a disaster of a president who destroyed the US economy with his 70%+ taxation. That Reagan managed to turn the country around so fast is unprecedented.

The truth of the matter is that what has failed is the socialism policies which are suppose to help the lower class but in reality they just make the prices of everything go up. Easy access to college loans, college prices skyrocket as demand rises. Easy access to home loans, the prices of homes skyrocket as demand rises. While you stand on how noble a principle it is that everyone should be able to afford both the reality of the policies set in place is that now almost no one can afford either without leveraging them self beyond their limits. You dont 'fix' affordability issues by dumping vast sums of money on the demand side of the equation, that always makes things LESS affordable. The only way to reduce costs is to increase supply, but the good ole socialists have no intention of doing that. It aids their cause for you to be forever indebted to them.

Obama has made some very poor choices in his personal/career life regarding the friends and mentors he has chosen, ie., Rev. Wright (hatemonger), Bill Ayers, (domestic terrorist), Tony Rezko (convicted felon and Chicago slum lord), Frank Marshall Davis, (racist against whites and member of American Communist party).   I believe he will make very poor choices on a presidential level. 

On Monday, a Florida news station was banned from having any more interviews with Obama people, because during an interview with Joe Biden, he was asked about Marxist comments that Obama made.  He lied and said Obama never said them, but they had the video tape of two occasions where Obama said those comments.  Obviously, Obama's camp does not want the truth of his real character to be known to the American public.  Communists do the same thing when someone questions their motives. 

Thanks to the Carter years, we had double digit inflation, double digit mortgage rates and thermostats at work set at 68 degrees by government mandate. All in all, I'd take Reagan's results every time.

I am so tired of people simply repeating election platitudes.  From reading these criticisms it is plain none of you know what socialism is.  The current tax policies is a redistribution of funds.  I would say most people posting here are not paying high tax amounts.  It you are itemizing, and watching your charitable donations etc you are taking advantage of existing tax policies.  The supply based economics is a no more than VooDoo economics.  the Reagan Years were no better than the Carter years as far as the economy goes.  It was not until 1993 that we saw the economic tables turn.  It was not supply side econ that caused the turn around.  Supply side years saw huge interest rates--Do any of you remember 15% mortgage rates? The gap between poor and wealthy grew exponentially in the 70's and 80's.  I had a contract at the time that guarented 1 % over CPI or inflation rate and it came to 12% that year.  Those were the supply side years.  Loss of jobs was unreal!So first off, learn what socialism is--it is not what Palin calls socialism and think back on your history--Reagenomics were no more than VooDoo economics.

Jerry, I love how your time frame there. 70's and 80's so that when you say unemployment went up, your are correct, because in the 70's it went way up under carter. But your deceit is clear seeing as it went down in the 80's under Reagan. Somewhere in 82 or 83 unemployment peaked and then came down. Same with mortgage rates etc. I really dont see how a new congress and a new president could of acted any faster.

 - if you look at the Gallup poll Obama is only leading by 2%

Obama high standards? 
Who was his mentor, Reverand Wright
If his reverand was white and talk about white people the way he did black, he would have never even been nominated, and if Obama didnt know his Reverand Views, after sitting over 20 years in those pews, it shows a bad decision to attend such a racist church.  We need a president to make good decisions!!!
His wife state on television that this was the first time she was proud of this country, leaves a sour note, especially with our military.  That why when they support McCain 8 out of 10. 
He (Obama) likes to chum with the likes of Bill Ayers.
On top of that he is a Lawyer.
A racist lawyer, who hangs with terrorist, whos' wife has been never been proud of our country untill recently, and a disabled vet who fought for this country that has bucked the system, a true maverick, it not rocket science.
Osama Bin Laden or Obama Sin Laden

A Smith: the only people I know who don't worry about huge deficits are Republican campaign big-wigs who stated during at least a couple of campaigns I remember that "Deficits don't matter."  I believe they were talking about electability of their ticket rather than an absolute, however.  Although I can't prove that from the behavior of the politicians they got elected.

The unafilliated organizations that have looked at the two budget/tax plans seemed to think neither plan would have an appreciable affect on deficits, and neither would kick-start the economy.  Senator McCain's plans did not look superior to Senator Obama's in that regard.

You are entitled to your opinion, but I think it is naive and foolish (unless you work pretty high up in, or own stock in one of the big corporations Reagan transferred tons of tax dollars to) to grossly overpay for defense "systems" that don't work.  I don't know anyone but Republican spinners and the uninformed who believe that "we defeated the USSR" by putting the mentally disturbed out on the street and funneling obscene amounts of tax $$ to huge "defense" corporations.  One of my husbands was in the Army during the Reagan years, and they were downsizing as fast as they could when it came to troops--I am willing to admit bias, but I believe military spending should include maintaing our military personnel in large part, and in preference to large, poorly performing toys that cost too much and don't do the job they were designed for.  I believe Reagan was excessively fond of such, but he had ties to at least one of the larger and less savoury corporations, as our current VP and former Secretary of Defense do (not all the same ones).  Much like Senator McCain's ties to lobbyists (since they are running his campaign).  I am willing to entertain the idea that who you know may influence who you fund.  Nobody should be able to appropriate $$ without complete transparency.

There is unlikely to be anything here we are going to agree on.  I think the "Reagan Legacy" is shameful, and you think that as long as the rich got richer, it is fine that the poor got poorer, if you think of them at all.  They probably don't even exist for you, except as parasites.  I hope you never find yourself, or those who do matter to you, in need of consideration that simply isn't there for you.

Ted C

what do we know about palin? she took on her party and put some of them in jail, had the oil companies return some profit to alaskan citizens.  has she made mistakes? oh yeah plenty of them by her own admission. but neither does she walk on water or raise the dead as the Annoited Messiah can.

don't bring up the trooper incident-i'll wait for the Pacific Justice Institute to issue their findings rather than a 100% partisan hearing in alaska that was held behind closed doors by one party only, nor her religion.  she hasn't used that in her governance there one iota; if you think she has, give me an example please.  and forget the secessionist stuff-neither she nor todd were card carrying members. if you want to use that, then every democrat (successor to the whig party- the party whose members in southern legislatures initiated a small brouhaha in this country from 1861-1865) can be considered questionable on the same grounds.

the feather in her cap is her role in Homeland Security's crisis management heirarchy. moreover, is she is on point for being in command of the only operational missle interceptor units in the nation (as commander of the alaska national guard) which are permanently activated units. under homeland security guidelines if incoming warheads from any source were detected, she has the authority to ok those units to act. the pentagon's rating of those units under her tenure compared to her predecessor, increased from mediocre to superb. (AF Times, Feb. 2008) 

oh, these are the same missle interceptors that obambam wants to eliminate (success rate is over 80%).  that gives me warm fuzzies knowing iran, north korea and now venezuela, argentina and bolivia, have working nuke weapons programs or about to commence them.

Obama plans is for trickle up poverty.

JollyRogers

Actually Reaganomics worked pretty good.

Yeahhhh... RIGHT!!!!!!

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

LCS,

  Thank you for being a McCain supporter.  You are an excellent example of why people with the ability to think on their own will support Obama.

Roger Rev. Wright's views were televised, and you know if he was a white preacher talking about black people as he did white, he would have never been nominated!!!

What his wife said was also televised, and as a disabled vet it makes me sick.

Osama Bin Laden or Obama Sin Laden if elected this country will be Sin Laden.

We must take back the house and Pass HR2755

The Federal Reserve System is no more “Federal” than Federal Express®!!

The FED was created in 1913 by an abominable act of Congress. With a swift stroke of the pen, President Woodrow Wilson doomed the fate of generations. And enslaved the American citizens to a life of servitude, to an elite group of international bankers.

The FED is in fact a private banking cartel, was created by some of the most prominent bankers of the day. Including J.P. Morgan, Rothschild Banks of London and Berlin, Lazard Brothers Bank of Paris, Israel Moses Sieff Banks of Italy, Warburg Bank of Hamburg, Germany and Amsterdam, Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York, Lehman Brothers Bank of New York, Goldman Sachs Bank of New York,Chase Manhattan Bank of New York (Controlled By the Rockefellers).

"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit privately concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world—no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men."
- Woodrow Wilson, reflecting on passage of the Federal Reserve Act

“If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks...will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered... The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."
President, Thomas Jefferson

In 1921 the same cast of CRIMINALS gave us another non-governmental organization, The Council on Foreign Relations, also known as the CFR. The CFR has run our federal government since its inception. Its aims are clear, and with an ever accelerating
rate of success they are only a few months or few years from achieving their goal… Maybe they already have?

Bill,

 That's right!  How well do you believe McCain is going to get along with Congress?  He can't even get along with his own running mate. 

Roger - take off your political blinders! Get over your attack mode if you really want it fixed, or intelligently discussed. If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem!

The problem is fixing Congress, go back and research you're old civics classes (if you ever had any, stayed awake during the classes, or are old enough to remember) about the branches of government, and work in a constructive direction. Get off of your partisan politics. I hear idiots spouting partisan rhetoric, and I immediately know they don't know what they are talking about, they are bandwagon followers. 

Congress has a long history of doing what they want to do, so we should decide if we are happy with the conduct of congress and their vision for the future.  They are in no way a rubber stamp for the president.  You might recall in the past congressional leaders declared the Presidents budget dead on arrival!  It has happened so often you can pick virtually any Presidents term and find the quote.  Things are the way they are because congress wants it that way, they made the decisions to endorse the policy.  things happened in the last few months because congress is incompetent.  The President suggests the congress delivers, we have given these folks a pass on responsibility for the current mess and we will pay the price in the very near future.  They are giddy, anticipating the power they will have, we should be shaking in our boots because we are going to get a big dose of the same. 

Amen!

Would you say we need to return to the Gold Standard where the dollar is actually backed by something?

I agree with going back to the gold standard.

Really!  Maybe we should go back to the Indian days and "Wampum"??

You have no idea what you're talking about.

TED C-it is amazing how naive and ignorant you are of facts.

It is quite clear jolly roger you do not either.

Hey, G.Jerry, put your facts where your mouth is.

Jolly-what facts would you like?

benram:  NO ONE can SOLVE this problem.  The problem was CREATED by he dem/lib/socialist/communists in Congress.  They passed a law called the "Community Revitalization Act" under Clinton.  The law said that because of complaints of "redlining", people weren't able to purchase homes.  The law FORCED banks and mortgage companies to STOP USING THE SAME CRITERIA FOR EVERYONE regard CHECKING CREDIT.  In other words, give credit to low income people, even if they couldn't make the payments.  While they did NOT change the law that BUSINESS CAN ONLY BE IN BUSINESS IF THEY SHOW A PROFIT.

If banks and mortgage companies did NOT follow that law, they could lose their licenses.  Most of these banks and mortgage companies trade on the open market, borrow and loan to each other.  So when the mortgages were made, the banks paid out the money of the face value of the mortgage, and were forced to trust that those mortgages would actually pay off.  Some of them were risky and the banks knew that.  So the banks and mortgage companies bundled risky mortgages with non risky mortgages, converted them to securities and traded them on the open market, just as they do with other mortgages.  This new way of doing business gave birth to the sub-prime mortgage industry.  Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were largely responsible for a great many of these mortgages...and somehow the GAAP rules that every other business is supposed to follow, simply didn't apply to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.  To keep the monies flowing, lobbyists for those two giants began paying bribes for Congress to keep turning a blind eye.  They didn't want to be looked at too closely.

In 2003 the numbers were around 3000 on Wall street.  We began seeing a great many hedge funds and that coupled with the housing and mortgage problems created a false economy.  The numbers kept climbing and climbing and climbing.  Wise investors invested in long term investments...safe investments.  Speculators did otherwise.

Wall street is also very sensitive to whatever is going on in our economy and our political scene.  They are not happy with the prospect of the house, senate and the presidency going to a Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Barack Obama.  They do not want to see our government converted to one of Communist. 

On a more personal note, and a good indicator of where this dem/lib/socialist/communist government is going under an Obama...Congress is presently attempting to take away the tax incentives for our 401(k)'s and 457(b)'s.  It is their plan to actually steal those monies from our accounts in August, to fold them into Social Security.  Now, under our free enterprise capitalistic society, we know that money doesn't belong to the government....however, under a communist government, we won't own anything.  The government owns everything and can walk into your home and confiscate anything they want.  A communist government owns our money in the banks and can take our money whether we want the to or not.  Under a Communist government, they get to decide how much money we need to retire on and how much we even need to eat.

So, not only will they take our money and fold it into social security, but they will make a show of paying 3% interest on the monies each year and then THEY will determine how much of a check we get each year...because what we have worked for as citizens of a free market economy to add to what we would get from social security, will not exist and we no longer have our homes to borrow against in our retirement either.  What happens if we get ill?  Well, if the government decides that our lives have any value, perhaps we will get on a waiting list to see a doctor, after Obama grants us our socialized medicine, because our insurance company will no longer exist.

But it's okay, because Barack and the Dem/lib/socialist/communists will be sending checks to everybody to keep them shut up.  Of course, after awhile everybody will be on the dole, because generation x is not real hot on working anyway.  So where does the government get the money to keep supporting us?  If everybody is on the dole, nobody is paying taxes and guess what...that's where the government gets their money is from our taxes.

We really need to re-think our options.  The devil you know is probably better than the devil you don't.  So I think I'm probably voting the entire Republican ticket.   As angry as I am about the Republicans not preventing what has happened, I have to accept my own culpability in reducing them to a minority in the white house.  I was angry with the Republicans because they didn't fight the dem/lib/socialist/communists.  They allowed the dems to filibuster when they didn't have a filibuster.  They allowed the dem/lib/socialist/communists to vote in a simply majority of 60 to pass anything they wanted. 

I helped to weaken the Republican party and I can't now be angry with them for not having enough people in both the house and the senate to overcome a communist agenda.  Now, President Bush has had to react to what has been done to this nation by these communists, but nationalizing our banks and major businesses.  To put a communist in the white house now will create what Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Barack Obama want.  We will allow this country to become a fully communist nation...not a nice benign sounding socialist country.

nkorb11

 The problem was CREATED by he dem/lib/socialist/communists in Congress. 

Just more spewing lies as usual.....

You mean the democratic congress that got a slim lead in January 2007?  You mean the congress that has had 12 bills veto'd by Bush since they got that slim lead, when Bush hadn't veto'd a single bill in the 7 years before that?

Here is the undenialble REAL truth of what happened.

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms

joe m - are you stuck on stupid. The 700 billion bailout was done by CONGRESS, they are the only ones with constitutional authority.

Harborside, I have been reading thru your posts and I have come to the conclusion that you are an idiot.  The Dems have the GOP to thank for the Bailout, and now they are trying to tout it as their own.  Typical.

harborside

Who was it that proposed the bailout again?

I think harborside has that evil Congress in his (her?...oh, please no) sights, and may not be able to answer at this time.  I won't take the time to look it up, so correct me if I am wrong?

The bill was "submitted" to Congress by the Bush Administration, in a very compact form (i've heard 1-3 pages) which provided for the entire $700 billion to be handed over to the Secretary of the Treasury forthwith.  The Secretary is a member of the Presidents CABINET.  The bill was accompanied by strict admonitions to Congress that it NEEDED to be passed within 3 days to avoid dire consequences to all and sundry and irreparable damage to our economy.  It included, in addition to the entire amount being ponied up and forked over to the Administration Secretary, NO provisions for any sort of real-time oversight, and a specific section prohibiting any sort of review of what the Administration might DO with the $$.

The final version that was passable by Senate and House provided for dedicated oversight of the spending, with reports required at specific intervals (or possibly 'reasonable' intervals).  It did away with the unprecedented (I hope) section prohibiting any kind of accountability after the fact (of spending).  And it provided for a smaller amount, not the full amount, being handed over initially, with Congressional review of funds expended and expenditures planned in order to collect further installments on the total amount.  I have the worst memory, so I may have filled in a couple of blanks in this paragraph; if so, my apologies, not an EVIL Far Left attempt to mislead.  I've heard heated allegations of "Democrats refusing to pass it without packing it full of pork" but I can't speak to that because I only scanned the ToC.  Mind you, I didn't see a chapter on "Pork", but that is no guarantee.

I still don't like it--not that anyone asked my opinion--but transparency in the form of oversight and mandated reporting of expeditures beats none, and ditching the "Review Prohibited" section beats leaving it in.  (It's not as if anyone ever submits or passes the kind of stuff I think would be cool  ~whine~)

Promoting confidence is only an illusion!! It does nothing to fix the underlying problem.

Confidence of the masses or confidence of the CEO's? There is a lot not being said in the article. Business owners need to have confidence in the leadership to begin expanding again.

The only confidence booster would be for Congress to abolish the Federal Reserve and our fiat currency!

MF in CT,

business shows their confidence in voting with their $, and those 'votes' go overseas if obambam wins.  survey after survey by CEO magazine says business is taking their work overseas.  hope you like gummint handouts. 

the only confidence he exudes is an illusion; the only substance he backs up 'change' with is confiscating what others have earned to buy more votes with those who will not take responsibility for themselves.

The congress CAN reinstate regulations that would stop corporations from engaging in previously illegal acts, and they SEC (Who's head is appointed by the president) can enforce those and the existing regulations that do the same.

Chris Cox and the Bush administration have chosen not to enforce MANY of the existing rules and several more have been scrapped in the last 8 years.  Together with a HUGE debt, these things are a DIRECT cause of the this crisis.

It was NO accident!!!!

OBAMA/BIDEN 08   Let's bring some SANITY back to the country

average...so me which regulations have been rescinded (that would be in the CFR) or not enforced.  cite chapter and verse. lack of regulations or enforcement of same had nothing to do with this meltdown.  fact is, 5 times - 1999, 2001, 2003, 2005, 2007 - the gop and W attempted to extend oversight to fannie and freddie. those are the 2 entities solely responsible for this morass.

and chris dodd said it was fearmongering. barney frank said it was unnecessary. youtube has the videos from c-span.

The congress CAN reinstate regulations that would stop corporations from engaging in previously illegal acts

Average Joe -

That's just closing the barn door after the horse has left, which Congress has a history of doing after economic debacles originating in the private sector. Expect no relief from Washington.

no one can ifx this mess in four years. the current party in office has sealed our fate.

bdorgle - You definitely are stuck on stupid! Haven't you been reading the posts. I'm beginning to think the HIGHLY uneducated is depending on this guy OBAMA to bail them out.

Might as well root for the football team whose players have the best looking buns. ( the way my daughter picks football teams in the office pool).

People, it is up to us. We know fraud when we see it. It's been going on for almost twenty years, enough to spread the blame on a lot of politicians and parties. Truth is, its us. We don't take the time to study facts and issues, we take the soundbites and HOPE for the best. We get what we deserve, and I don't see any changes coming. Obama, if elected, will be strapped with trillions of debt (nobody knows the real number), and will be voted out in four years when it is a republican time. I can't believe this race is so close, when any other democrat would have closed the deal by now due to the anti republican mood in America. Wait till NOBAMA establishes a voting record other than present. Wait till the mood of the country changes against the democrats (the pendulum always swings both ways, and this country is very divided), then Sarah will run and win handily. I do believe the democrats are really setting themselves up. Disagree? Then you must foolishly think he will solve these problems. He is probably going to spend the first year being TESTED by the rest of the world. Hope the military fights for him, I'm retired, I wont be. From what I hear from troops, he doesn't have much support in the military. I'll be in the mountains, still clinging to my guns and religion.

Oh, yeah, that's going to change someone's mind, harborside.  You really do sound bitter.  (I guess Senator Obama was right about you.)

And I'd love to see your data suggesting "We know fraud when we see it." (Not a big fan of clinging to guns & religion, but I suppose I am bitter, too.)

Here it is, as plane as can be.....  Who got us in the messes, and who got us out.

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms

The answer is simple

Obama/Biden 08

harbor, as i said no one will be able to fix this mess in four years. I agree it has been a long time coming starting with Carter somewhat, then Reagan (may he burn in the imaginary place hell) Bush Sr. Clinton (but at least he left GWB with a SURPLUS) but GWB bless his mess, has now left us barely able to function.

OBAMA 2008

Kucinich/Paul 2012

Actually, it was the democratic congress and democrats in charge of Fanny Mae, Freddie Mac, etc. that contributed most to the mess.  Didn't Nancy Pelosi promise that they would lower gas prices if they were elected the majority in congress?  Shortly after, the price almost doubled.  Democrats were in charge of Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac, and look what they did.  The Democratic Congress blocked every bill that would regulate or investigate anything they controlled, and look what resulted.

Ahhh SuzyQ...

Uninformed is an understatement....

Did you even know that Fannie and Freddie "were" private companies?  Did you know that private companies are controlled by the SEC?  Did you know that the SEC is headed by a fellow named Chris Cox that was appointed by George Bush?  Did you know that he and Alan Greenspan had the philosophy that the "market" will handle things?  You should resally get educated before posting.....

FYI: The dems gained a small amjority in congress in January 2007.  For the 7 years before  that, they couldn't get a memo out much less get a bill passed...  Since then, they have tried several times to help with this crisis, but what they DID get out got veto'd or died in the senate....  As follows......

Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act of 2007 (Referred to Senate Committee after being  Received from House)[H.R.3915.RFS]

Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act of 2007 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House)  [H.R.3915.EH]

American Home Ownership Preservation Act of 2007 (Introduced in Senate)[S.2114.IS]

S.A.F.E. Mortgage Licensing Act of 2008 (Introduced in Senate)[S.2595.IS]

Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act of 2007 (Reported in House)[H.R.3915.RH]

Mortgage Enhancement and Modification Act of 2008 (Introduced in Senate)[S.2801.IS]

All of this and more is readily available if people know where, and take the time to look.

www.senate,gov

www.house.gov

Want to know the facts behind attacks and smears?  These "nonpartisan" sites are specifically for that purpose.

www.politifact.org

www.factcheck.org

www.snopes.com

Please be educated and don't fall for smears.....   Pass it on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

SuzyQ,

  Who was in charge between 2000 and  January 2007?  Are you saying the Government controls the price of gas?  I will check that out and see if you are right.  As a matter of fact I believe all of us should.  lol

Average Joe:

FHA was start so americans, could by homes with little or no money down, FANNIE MAE is quasy private.  Lenders like to finance 80% of the value of the property.  When you put down less than 20% you pay mortgage insurance.  Which protects the lender in case of foreclosure.  When a lender forecloses there are costs of repairs and real estate fees, if there is a loss mortgage insurance covers it.  The majority of those in foreclosure are loans that should have never been done in the first place.  Example:  The lenders were doing Stated Income Loans, in this case you state what you make and the lender does the loan with out checking income.

McCain tried to pass reform for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac but was stopped.

The only thing the next president could do, is pass laws on the appraisal industry.  Many of you that bought houses will find the appraiser appraised your house for the contract price.  Remember those who originate your loans, sold them, and they didnot care how much you borrowed.

We need a Maverick to change things.

Not a Lawyer

Not a racist, we got to see who his Pastor was on Television.

Not a first lady, who was not proud of this country until recently.

Not someone who likes to hang with terrorist.

He will tax us out of this recession?

Lets not forget what a lot of people said in the past about the people they are sucking up to right now!  Romney regarding McCain, Clinton regarding Obama and vice-versa, HuckleBERRY regarding McCain and Romney, etc., etc.  This is usually referred to as "political BS" and should be taken as no more, no less.

Romney would have been the better choice!

At this point Romney would have absolutely been the better choice with his economic credentials.  And I think the choice of Sarah Palin doomed the Republican ticket from the get-go, and this will ultimately haunt McCain for the rest of his life.

I am not sure why the Repubs choose to nominate McCain this go-around.  They have passed on him so many times before.  Coming from the subprime industry the economy has pretty much been my biggest concern even before it was popular to say so.  As an idependent I choose to vote in the Republican primary because I liked Romney on the economy.  Now I am stuck picking between two candidates who tout the same story with a slightly different cover.  How do you pick a better pile of s*it??

of course he said that he was trying to get the same nomination. D U M B

u have got to be kidding

you have got to be kidding

People are so stupid. The top 1% of income earners already pay 40% of the taxes. Let's see, if we triple that then tax revenues will go up 20% and no one else will have to pay anything. Sounds fair to me.

urlemmings-how sad you are indeed!!!! Yeah, I guess after the IMF/World Bank poured billions of dollars into underdeveloped countries around the globe, things got better for those nations? Ha! In fact, the opposite has happened. No development has taken place. Most countries are worse off than before the Saviors of the World got to them. All that ever happens is that the money simply disappears down the drain of political corruption and waste! The bureaucracy that it creates  enjoys a plush life administering the process, and the politicians on the receiving end obtain wealth and power!

The truth is that all socialist regimes have the potential for genocide. The burtalities of these countries are all in a day's work for serious socialists who view them as merely unfortunate necessities for the building of their utopia! Lenin (not the Beatle) said you cannot make an omelet without cracking a few eggs. Oh-and let's not forget what George Bernard Shaw, one of the early leaders of the Fabian Socialist movement, said:

Under Socialism, you would not be allowed to be poor. You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, taught, and employed whether you liked it or not. If it were discovered that you had not character and industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner; but whilst you were permitted to live, you would have to live well.

Hmmmm......sounds like a great place to live. Urlemmings-your rants make me sick as it should all americans.

Lemmings are small rodents, usually found in or near the Arctic, in tundra biomes. Together with the voles and muskrats, they make up the subfamily Arvicolinae (also known as Microtinae), which forms part of the largest mammal radiation by far, the superfamily Muroidea, which also includes the rats,

The behaviour of lemmings is much the same as that of many other rodents which have periodic population booms and then disperse in all directions, seeking the food and shelter that their natural habitat cannot provide. Lemmings of northern Norway are one of the few vertebrates who reproduce so quickly that their population fluctuations are chaotic,^[1] rather than following linear growth to a carrying capacity or regular oscillations. It is unknown why lemming populations fluctuate with such variance roughly every four years, before plummeting to near extinction.^[2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemming

SickNTired-LMAO!!!

well said! America needs to make drastic change.

Kucinich/Paul 2012

Oh, Then the Government would be RICH and would decide who needs what and when.

Yeh,  STEAL from the people that worked hard to have things and give it to the have nots to make them EQUALLY POOR.  Talk about money and business going over seas.

THATS CRAZY TALK.  I HOPE YOUR THE FIRST TO PAY YOUR SHARE.

Another one "STUCK ON STUPID". This economy is going to be about JOBS! When was the last time you got a job from a poor person. It's the rich that create jobs, so they can be richer DUH. Or we can get government to create jobs, thats so efficient (read tongue in cheek).

Bill Clinton was the closest democrat to a moderate political view, which led to good economic times, we need a moderate view, not liberal left or conservative right.

I hear the owner of Miami Dolphins is selling the team due to the possibility of OBAMA getting elected. If he does get elected, I think we see an entreprenurial drain in this country. It's too global of a world to think USA is the only place to live and work. Costa Rica looking good for me. I can go down there and create jobs, and be respected.

Move to China if you like socialism.

My husband's 457(b) is connected to his job.  So in order to be able to take our money out of the fund, he would have to quit his job.  We can only take a loan against half of it, and we can stop contributing to it, but we can't get all our money out before Obama is elected.  We're scared...that is our retirement fund.  We're not young and we can't afford to be stolen from.

jollyrogers,

if you triple the rates on the top 5 or 10%, those rates will approach 90% marginal rate. the last that happened was in carter's term.  and that 5 or 10% paid less than 1/3 of all income taxes, compared to over 60% now.

look what happened when clinton doubled the cap gains rates- there was zero revenue, or close to zero, from that source until W's cuts. what does obambam think is going to happen?

Uhhhh... you skipped over Clinton, which is EXACTLY where the taxes would be under Obama....  What happened then?  More jobs, Highwr Pay, Lower debt, etc. etc.

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms

All the data is there..... and neither Bush nor McCain can't run from it

Hey Joe, are you saying that Clinton and Rubin did not spend tax payer money? Are you saying that the Federal Reserve did not create and spend money by helping to fund the IMF/World Bank and loan money to other nations directly? Are you that naive to think that we the taxpayers are not going to be responsible for footing these bills once these nations default on their loans, which by the way is already happening. C'mon man-you can't be serious!

uh, joe...that surplus was illusory as demonstrated by PwC-world's largest accounting firm. 

for 4 years after his tax increases, revenue was static...debt up. the top 10% paid less as a share of total income taxes then than they do now.

higher pay?  my income, and those of everyone i know, is higher today than it was then.

more jobs?  ummm...there have been 8-10 million jobs added the last 8 years.  btw, the 90s were the heyday of offshoring. read clinton's own dept of labor stats.

WELL PUT!!

Democrats had control of the House and the Senate for the last two years. If they are such a stand up group, then why didnt they do something sooner to stop this mess? Or at least to lessen its effect? They saw it coming!

Also, If the Democrats are so great, Then why did they not want to pass this last bailout package until after the extra Pork was added to it? Guess they were really looking out for us by wasting more money on wooden arrows that kids play with.

Democrats have not had a veto proof majority in the Senate.
There are a bunch of obstructionist republicans in the senate and a half-wit president with a veto pen who will be out the door next week.
Then we can start on the long road to getting this country out of the toilet.

8 years of CLINTON PRINTING MONEY was the problem.

Wrong.  It happened under the Democratic majority Congress.  Nancy Pelosi promised lower gas prices if they were elected the majority.  Shortly after, the price almost doubled.  Who ran Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac?  Democrats.  Who blocked bill after bill to investigate and regulate Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac?  Democrats.  Who keeps trying to brush off Obama's poor choices of friends and mentors (Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko, Frank Marshall Davis)?  Democrats.  Who tries to pretend that Obama does not make Marxist comments?  Democrats. 

You are so funny.  Are the names listed (and all disproved in factcheck.com) are all you have to support your candidate? It is also very plain to see you do not know any political theory at all.  All you have left is to turn to McCarthyism and its sickening tactics in order to prove your points.  It is people like you who claim to love America, but hate any Americans who disagree with you.  Please use logical arguments to prove your point rather Limabaugh like rants filled with candy floss like logic.

true it happened on their watch...the genesis however was in the 1977 CRA (which the gop tried several times to reform) and the 1993 NHIO. 

five times the gop (and W) tried to extend regulatory oversight to fannie and freddie, only to have chris dodd and barney frank shut it down. google it.

it was the democrats in congress?  You mean the ones that had ZERO control for the last 8+ years and have had a slim lead since 2007?  You mean the ones that can't get past a Bush veto?

Perhaps you can explain this?

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms

joe, vyvanse is a great ADD med...take some and do try and stay on point with the topics i and others raise.  you're posting the same stuff as a response to every post.

It's the congress who pass laws, and once McCain takes office, will focus on them!

YES!  And cheers to Reagan for initiating this BS trend.

And who do you think creates any jobs in this country. The very poor?

trickle down was a derisive term coined by tip o'neill, who led the charge in the 70s for the 70 and 90% tax rates we had at that time-and zero job growth, double digit inflation, etc. 

what the revenue figures show from reagan's tax cuts, and W's tax cuts, is that revenue grew by double digit amounts in the years following the cuts. IRS income bulletins, GAO, CBO 

under w's cuts, the top 5% of income earners (not wealthy-that's a measure of net assets not income) are now paying over 50% of all income taxes; the top 10% are paying 68%. W's cuts took nearly 40 million low income people off the tax rolls.   IRS income bulletins, verified by GAO

so when i hear nonsense like obambam saying 'spread the wealth' what he really means is that job creators and entrepreneurs will be punished so he can give tax cuts to people who already pay no tax. that's called 1 - welfare; and, 2 - vote buying.  call it what you want, but that's the reality.

Well said, although the last figures I saw said the top 5% now pay 60% of the taxes.

mea culpa.

that's the problem of forgetting the vyvanse this morning, and trying to look up stuff while at work.  i blew it.

Anybody that thinks "Trickle Down" economics works, take a look at this.....

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms

Didn't work under Reagan, Didn't work under Bush, Won't work under McCain....  In fact, it has never worked anywhere in the world, in all of history.

What your citing has nothing to do with "Trickle Down" economics. It has to do with employment rates not gdp to debt ratios. Also Bush isnt even following the same financial plan reagan did. Why do you think so many republicans are upset with bush and the 2000-2004 congress?

The Federal Reserve is the money source. They create it out of thin air! As long as it is allowed to operate and exist, the American taxpayer will be responsible for footing the bill plus interest.

You're absolutely right. It will take years to get out of this mess as it took years to get into it (far more years than Bush was in office).

Obama isn't running against McCain. He is running against mass ignorance.
We have already had redistribution of wealth in this country starting with Reagan and continuing through the Bush years. The wealth was redistributed from the middle class and poor up to the very wealthy. Obama will end Bush's tax cuts for the rich.
But he shouldn't stop there. He should end Reagans tax cuts for the rich as well.
Most of the righties are really just middle class workers who think they are in the top 5% if they make $40,000. to $60,000. per year. - LOL!

I agree with the mass ignorance part. But to think that Obama is going to change anything is not realistic. McCain won't either!! Tax cut policies will do nothing to correct the underlying problem. The simple fact that banks are allowed to counterfiet 10x's what is deposited to loan to the sheeple, and then collect interest on it is absurd! Then when you couple that with the fact that the bailout package money was simply created out of thin air by the Fed, and then given to the banks to then create 10x's what was deposited is nothing but a damn scam!! All this does is devalue our dollar and destroys us with inflation! The fact is that our purchasing power has declined by over 27% just since 2000. It has declined over 90% since 1920! All the funny money in the world can't buy us out of this problem! Our entire monetary policy is an illusion and nothing more. If we don't stop creating money and spending soon, the house will come crashing down harder than it is today! Because one day we will wake up and find out that our money is nothing but worthless paper....and we are closer to this then you might think.

 - the poor don't pay Federal Income tax. 40% of working Americans don't pay Federal income taxes. Those that don't work at all and those that don't pay any Federal income taxes are benefiting from the remaining 60% of us working Americans who do pay federal income tax.

We have a safety net for those who need it. The government is not and should not be responsible for satisfying our every need. Even our parents weren't expected to take care of our every need, want and desire.

If we have needs and desires beyond what our government provides, we need to get up, go out and do whatever is necessary to EARN ON OUR OWN what we need to satisfy  those requirements.

C.L.M.~ Well said!

Wrong...they don't plan on shutting down Social Security.  They plan on refunding it with our 401(k)'s and 457(b)'s

This nation will be very socialist

Hmmmm... Repealing the Bush tax cuts all of a SUDDEN has become socialist......

I wonder what John McCain thought about those VERY SAME tax cuts BEFORE he decided to run for president again?  Let's ask him!!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNke6ad0t6g

I guess John McCain is a socialist?

The only thing that the constitution points out is that it is government alone that sets monetary policy, such as creating coins, etc. Except Congress usurped the constitution by establishing the Federal Reserve in 1913, which is owned by the Private Banks, to do this.

Its always been in the Democratic Play Book.

Congress...legislative...creates our laws. 

nkorb1-Congress does not create or control our monetary policy! The Federal Reserve does.

Even the Federal Reserve is bound by Congressional law.

Yes, but Congress allows the Fed to create and control our monetary policy. Congress has no say in it! They however do have the authorization to abolish the Fed if they want, but that will never happen with the clowns we have in office now.

nkorb...show me the clause in the formation of the Fed system that states they are subject to congressional oversight.  the senate merely confirms the head of the fed.

the Consititution only gives congress limited say over economic matters-taxes, tarriffs, and interstate commerce.  what clause of the Constitution permits them to consider legislation to exercise further control?

Obama (RobinHood) will fix it with MORE of your money.

not more of your money but more of our money, how is it that the poor and needy continue to support the greedy,john is trying to keep the wealth of this country in the hands who have control you for too long. stop talking about what you do not have and from the response of some of you, will neve have. do you not know while you play into the hands who have taken so much from you are currently investing their money back into the system that you just bail out with taxpayers dollars and when the recovery comes , and don't be fooled it will , we will continue with business as usual with John in the white house, so stop worrrying about what you do not have and start worrying about what you need, you need a government that works for all americans we the rich have nothing to lose with Obama but you the middle class and the lesser classes do if you vote for McCain. No I do not have anything to lose but the nation does. Vote Obama and vote for your need not that of the ones who only think of you when it is time for your vote and then you vote from your fear. what is your fear where does it come from, I will tell you where ,fear that will not be able to suppport your families and provide a better future for them or is it the fear that a black man will prove you wrong about the great race. the race is not about color it is about dollars and jobs. do not concern yourselves about the corporations they will continue to operate right here lets make them accountable to us. lets make government accountable to us not just the few who can buy whatever we want for now is the time that we say we want the american dream for all americans,we want we want the all americans to receive the same health coverage that our representaives have we pay for  them to have this so lets share it with all americans,we want to be able to travel the world again where as americans we are respected and no matter where we travel we fear not for we are americans, I am so sick of the smears and dirty tricks that have been used in this election that I am now speaking as a gop member from birth,the dishonor that McCain has done to my party and to the nation is not and cannot be allowed to continue.wake up and vote Obama for his is the way for all of us and if McCain is allowed to be appointed then you will see that the last 8 years is nothing to the ones to come for you the middle class and the lesser ones. If you thought that Bush pushed us to the bink you have not seen anything yet for John will bring this country and all of us with him to the greates depression that the world have ever seen.

lady,

first, the bailout is a result of a congressionally created mess by the 1977 CRA and the 1993 NHOI, not as a result of the banking industry doing something on their own.  they merely followed congressional mandates. 

one more time...CRA was the result of acorn lobbying congress to compel banks to do more lending to low-income and minority applicants, without regard to credit worthiness.  a bonus points system was established whereby regulatory approval for anything the bank wanted to do was based solely on the CRA point ratings.  furthermore, loans to those categories of borrowers was exempt from regulatory examination.

not content with the outcome of CRA, acorn again went to congress. this time, congress told (federally chartered) banks that they had to expand their subprime mortgage lending.  this was accomplished by telling freddie and fannie to guarantee mortgage applications with welfare payments and food stamps as income sources. then-ceo of fannie, franklin raines, directed fannie to make subprime mortgages 1/2 of the mortgage guaranteed loans within 5 years. it was accomplished in 3.  by guaranteeing such shaky loans, for the first time in history, home value appreciation outstripped both the gdp growth and the cpi index. 

in 1999, 2001, 2003, and 2005, the gop (and W) attempted to extend regulatory oversight to fannie and freddie. chris dodd and barney frank blocked those efforts, stating that no problem existed, as little as 3 months before fannie collapsed.

mortgage bankers like countrywide, and state chartered banks got in on the subprime lending act so as to not lose some of that business. their subprime loans were guaranteed by fannie and freddie as well.  had those 2 groups of lenders not went after that business, then they would have been sued for negligence and breach of fiduciary duty by shareholders.

outsourcing of jobs-please see post 24.2 below, 2nd paragraph.

12 billion dollars a month would go a long way here at home to provide better schools, healthcare, jobs

schools are a state and local function, not specified in the Constitution as a federal responsibility. those items not enumerated in the Constitution as a federal responsibility are left to the states.

jobs-see post 22.

healthcare - again, where in the Constitution is that listed as a function of the federal government? 

btw, if you haven't been reading the news, the iraqis have take responsibility for their own security and future.

the Constitution was written to protect people from the government, not government from the people. and it was written to maximize everyone's opportunities to provide for their own needs. (paraphrase of T Jefferson)

"Nowhere can I put my finger on that place in the Constitution that allows the people's representatives to vote for beneficient payments to others with their constituents money".  Thomas Jefferson, Documents of American History, edited by Commager, vol 1, 95

Too late, Bush got there first, and if you've got any left you must be rich!

Linda-ladywolf
You must be another that decides on soundbites and rhetoric. Please study the facts, don't get your facts from here or the political webpages, there are plenty of unbiased sources on the internet. "It's the economy, stupid" and the economy depends on jobs. Jobs don't come from poor people. DO YOUR HOMEWORK BEFORE YOU OPEN YOUR PIEHOLE.

Good post wildweasel, I see you are educated on the subject and have the jist of the facts. You must be in the financial sector of business. Again, good post.

ummm...linda?  vyvanse is a great ADD med...take some and do try and stay on point and address the relevant points in my post.

thank you.

Boy.. what a bunch of hooey!!!  CRA?  Please!!!!  Rather than type.. I'll just give you an article from a REAL news source that at least backs what they say with sources. 

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-cra25-2008oct25,0,394443.story

Hey harborside, debating is fun, but mean and nasty name calling is un-called for! Everyone has a right to their feelings and to state their opinion. I believe there might even be some kind of law about freedom of speech.

joe,  read the legislation that enacted CRA, and if you can't put the talking points away long enough, come back and tell me what it says. 

sorry, but the LA times lost credibility with the vietnam war.  as gen'l giap said, they were the nva and viet congs 2nd best ally next to the nyt.