How many wall street lobbyists are on McCain's staff now? 87 you say?

Yeah Snoop probably...but more importantly, what the hell did MMFA do to this site? I hate this new look. It looks like HuffPo.

Ok, back to work I go.

Snoopy--maybe it would be easier to count the members of his staff that AREN'T lobbyists.

September 16, 2008 John McCain opposes bailouts.

September 17, 2008 John McCain supports bailouts.

September 19, 2008 John McCain opposes bailouts.

Well, he is campaigning as the candidate of change...  ;>)

Funny! :-)

I love the Mccain strategy of "Blaim Obama for the things I did."  I especially love how recently lackeys from the Mccain camp were blasting Biden for voting for the Gramm-Leach-Bliley bill.  But unfortunately for them Biden voted against it.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/16/203823/008/1013/601053

Oh, hush.  Stop upsetting the narrative; as we all know, facts have a well-known Liberal bias. 

What cracks me up is how fast an baseless accusation (like the relationship with Raines) becomes a staple of the conservative arguing points.

tinyee,

Is this another of those baseless accusations?

http://www.crosscut.com/2008-election/14877/Obama's+V.P.+headhunter+is+vetted+himself,+by+the+WSJ/

PlowedCon, I'm sure Timmee appreciates the backup (you demonstrating how the Kool Aid drinkers buy into baseless accusations), but just for laughs;

In a nutshell, say, one sentence each, what are the accusations you think your links support? 

kernalchickenplucker,

Why I would be delighted and thank you for your kind request by the way!

Let's see, the first article regarding Ms. Gorelick, of Gorelick Wall fame, was another in a line of former Clinton staffers and democrats who oversaw Fannie and Freddie.

Secondly, it seems as if all that lobbying by those 'evile' McCainiacs was that the behest of Obama's/dems pals and he was receiving quite a bit of the largess and at a faster rate than those serving themselves longer than he.

The article regarding Johnson speaks to the issue of special perks that dems have regularly gotten, yet are decried by them at the same time.  Yet he remains an important insider in democrat party and chaired Obama's VP search committee.  (How's that one working out by the way?)

And finally, a note about the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190.  An act that McCain co-sponsored along with 4 other republican senators and 20 or so in the House, no dems there either, would have changed the way fannie and freddie were allowed to operate. The Board of fannie wrote a letter to the sponsers asking that this not be allowed to get out of committee.  Needless to say, that's probably when all those evile lobbyests looked to see who would be glad to have their palms greased to make this go away.  Wonder who was willing to get greased?

Anyway, thank you for the chance to respond.  I know that I used more than one sentence but the nutshell was large enough to hold the details.  Ta-Ta

Except for the fact that man left years ago, and still can't compare to the ex-Fannie Mae (or Freddie Mac) lobbyist who is literally running McCain's campaign.

lassie'spal,

Or is this one of those baseless accusations.....

http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/07/top-senate-recipients-of-fanni.html

The media is parroting everything McCain says lately.

Thanks for another wall, Jamie.

http://www.businessweek.com/bw50/content/mar2002/a3776033.htm

" Q&A with Fannie Mae's Jamie Gorelick The vice-chairman sees "a very, very strong 2002" and says Fannie and Freddie are "managed safely"

"In the wake of the Enron disaster, Federal National Mortgage Assn. (Fannie Mae) and Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. (Freddie Mac), the federally chartered mortgage banks that experienced explosive growth in 2001, have come under increased scrutiny. Once again, Republicans in Congress are threatening to conduct an investigation into the activities of the two -- No. 7 and No. 2, respectively, on this year's BusinessWeek 50 list of top performers -- some say in hopes of revoking the portions of the Fannie and Freddie charters that gives an implicit government guarantee to their borrowing.

BusinessWeek Associate Economics Editor Margaret Popper spoke with Fannie Mae Vice-Chairman Jamie Gorelick for BW Online about the prospects for the coming year. Edited excerpts from their conversation follow:

"Q: How did last year's economic turmoil affect your credit losses?
A: We are very well protected against credit losses, which fell to their lowest level in a generation -- since 1983 -- last year. They went from four basis points [0.04%] down to under one basis point [0.01%] of our outstanding portfolio. We believe that while credit losses may rise somewhat in the aftermath of the recession, they are likely to remain quite low in 2002.

Q: And why is that?
A: Well, our business is backed by homes with a considerable amount of equity. When I tell people that our portfolio consists of homes with an average equity exceeding 40% of market value, they are astonished. And 35% of the mortgages have third-party credit enhancement.

So we carefully monitor potential areas of credit loss. We try to keep our portfolio balanced across the country so that any particular area of credit exposure doesn't disproportionately affect us. We hedge demographically, we hedge geographically, we hedge with third-party credit enhancement. We hedge with equity, and we are data hogs."

Thank you Ms. Gorelick and here is your check for $26,000.000.00.

This is why the democrat leadership in Washington left town without considering any type of congressional investigation.

So in 2002 republicans were in charge of all three branches of govt, had the power to call for a special session, and instead of doing anything they went home and blamed democrats for going home. Boy, that's about as bright as McCain today.

McCain on banking and health

OK, a correspondent directs me to John McCain’s article, Better Health Care at Lower Cost for Every American, in the Sept./Oct. issue of Contingencies, the magazine of the American Academy of Actuaries. You might want to be seated before reading this.

Here’s what McCain has to say about the wonders of market-based health reform:

Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation.

So McCain, who now poses as the scourge of Wall Street, was praising financial deregulation like 10 seconds ago — and promising that if we marketize health care, it will perform as well as the financial industry!

I think PlowedCon has been reduced to the last resort of the wingnut poster; Linking to as many long boring articles as he can, hoping that nobody takes him seriously enough to bother reading the stuff that doesn't in any way support his "point". This usually happens right before the hysterical commie/racist blowup.

redbaronnemisis,

Did you see the one about Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190?  Look above and see how active the messiah was on that one! 

As far as the 'leaving town' without an investigation, that was my quote regarding Hairy Red about THIS week's financial crisis.  When will the democrat leaders insist on a commission to uncover all the corruption in fannie mae and how this crisis actually occurred.  Don't hold your breath.

So proud... the great situation for Fannie and Freddie was because of democrats malfeasance and the current situation is not the fault of republicans malfeasance in the form of deregulation.  

Have you never heard of "conforming" mortgage loans which are the only ones that Fannie used to accept.  Those required 20% down and a thorough check of borrower qualifications.  

Greed by financial institutions, too low interest rates by the fed and deregulation are what led to the housing boom and crash.  Who calls himself a deregulator?  Who was involved in the S&L crisis as one of the Keating 5?  This establishes his track record.  Who only this week is now calling for better regulation after 26 years of persistently calling for less regulation.  WOW!

Please note that I posted the excerpt from the link that you provided where Johnson was, in the opinion of the author, blameless of anything.  Are you just hoping that no one will actually check out your highly misleading assertions?  Standard republican operating procedure.  Low, low, low. 

needstofallofthewagonasap,

Look at my posting above for insight. 

The Keating 5 was a serious ethical lapse for McCain and the others involved, they were all democrat senators as I recall, but that is about 20 years old now and has no impact on today's economic issues.  It did serve to make McCain believe that governing people should not be influenced by money.  I think what we know today is that it is not the money that corrupts, it's willing lawmakers who are corrupt and looking for money that are the problem.  (Check out the leadership of Fannie since its inception).

As to Johnson, did you see where he was getting great loan rates from Countrywide?  Maybe he, like Dodd and others, were just a cat on a hot tin roof, 'depending on the kindness of strangers', to get those sweetheart deals.

By the way, save yourself and stop your foolish 12 step program before it is too late!

Here is a quote from the article of your link.  No smoking gun here.

"I have no idea whether Johnson received inappropriate special treatment from Countrywide — which he should not have done as Fannie Mae chair. We no doubt will find out soon. Nor has he been implicated in the Fannie Mae book-cooking that brought Raines down. That matter may now be revisited.

I am inclined to give Johnson the benefit of the doubt regarding the recent charges — and the old Fannie Mae charges as well. For one thing, I do not think he is so stupid, having gotten very rich, to have risked sanctions and his reputation for some below-market-rate personal mortgage loans."

inneedofafixlib,

This is from an article in National review regarding the dear Johnson.  But also look at just the executive summary of OFHEO report that I have also linked to and understand the depth of democrat corruption within fannie mae:

"More specifically, look at the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight's May 2006 report on mismanagement and corruption inside Fannie Mae, and you'll see some interesting things about Johnson. Investigators found that Fannie Mae had hidden a substantial amount of Johnson's 1998 compensation from the public, reporting that it was between $6 million and $7 million when it fact it was $21 million. From the report:

[Fannie Mae] failed to disclose to OFHEO in a timely manner a post-employment agreement with former CEO James Johnson that provided him with substantial compensation in addition to that already provided upon his termination as a Fannie Mae employee….

Shortly after the release of the September 2004 OFHEO report, an article in the December 23, 2004, Washington Post entitled “High Pay at Fannie Mae for the Well-Connected,” suggested that 1998 compensation for former Fannie Mae CEO James Johnson “was [reported to be] $6 million to $7 million a year,” in 1998. The total compensation in 1998 for Mr. Johnson was, in fact, substantially more.

An initial review of the 1999 Fannie Mae Proxy Statement “Summary Compensation Table” suggests the source of the Washington Post figure on 1998 compensation for Mr. Johnson. A close read of that proxy, including footnotes, shows that the Table itself listed only a small portion of the actual 1998 long-term compensation of Mr. Johnson. Mr. Johnson used a program available to only very senior Fannie Mae executives (Executive Vice President and above) to defer a sizable amount of earned Performance Share Plan shares. Fannie Mae disclosed in a footnote to the Summary Compensation table that Mr. Johnson deferred 111,623 shares; the actual value of the shares did not show up in the Summary Compensation Table."

http://www.ofheo.gov/media/pdf/FNMSPECIALEXAM.PDF

The gun IS smoking with a round or two left to be chambered.

The May 30, 2008 edition of "The Texas Observer" (texasobserver.org) details John McCain's (now ex) campaign co-chair, former Texas Senator (R) Phil Gramm's role in the current financial debacle.  Currently a vice president at UBS AG, a Swiss investment bank, Gramm was conveniently and (brilliantly) dumped when quoted referring to Americans as "whiners." One of McCain's chief economic advisers, Gramm is highly probable to end up as secretary of the treasury in a McCain administration.  You gotta read the article to wonder how Obama can possibly let McCain off the hook so easily in the current furor over a debacle that has the current administration now proposing to double our current national debt of a trillion dollars to bail out their friends at the top: this, by a party that claims to be fiscal conservatives?  Read - and pass the word.  This is the difference that can erase the damage of not-so-closet racism....