Pajamas Media

39 Comments

1. Ed Wallis:

The word “integrity” also seems to be greatly misused these days:

FROM: The Jawa Report, September 22, 2008
“Hope, Change, & Lies: Orchestrated “Grassroots” Smear Campaigns & the People that Run Them”
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/194057.php

OTHER: http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2008/09/did-obama-fund.html

Sep 22, 2008 - 2:57 am 2. Bob:

On 60 Minutes last night, BHO touted himself as the kind of person who can bring together people of various viewpoints in one room and reach a consensus. WHEN? In Illinois, he was a partisan Democrat, the protege of Emil Jones, the Senate President, who either voted the party line or just voted “Present.” In his two years in Washington before starting to run for President, Barry never brought together Republicans and Democrats to reach a bi-partisan agreement on anything major. This is a man who, when experience is lacking, just makes things up. Contrast this with John McCain and Sarah Palin who actually have worked with members of the opposition – for better or worse (e.g., McCain-Feingold) – or against the entrenched members of their own party for change. Believe me, I’ve got my doubts about McCain, but with BHO on the other side of the ballot, my decision will be an easy one.

Sep 22, 2008 - 4:19 am 3. Sissy Willis:

Some words are more equal than others?

Sep 22, 2008 - 4:50 am 4. Ed Wallis:

“Earning” a reputation in a “new” way:

“Who sent Obama?”
http://globallabor.blogspot.com/2008/04/who-sent-obama.html

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/259051

Sep 22, 2008 - 5:55 am 5. pearl:

l support obama no matter what critics say

Sep 22, 2008 - 6:48 am 6. Ex-fetus:

I thought that line was from ‘Princess Ida’ (Castle Adamant) by Gilbert and Sullivan. Oh well, what would an old man living on a hill covered with trees know about Kkuullture?

“Any fool can criticize, condemn, and complain – and most fools do.”
Dale Carnegie

Sep 22, 2008 - 6:55 am 7. Sarah:

Dear “Pearl”
Congratulations on sticking to your guns no matter what, I consider it extremely good sense to “blindly cling” to your opinion regardless of all the evidence to the contrary! Too bad the same can’t be said of your candidate for “change”. (Please tell me you’re catching the sarcasm!) Since you’re so determined to support the socialist I’m sure you won’t mind helping me out with all the extra taxes that will be heaped on me if we’re “lucky” enough to have B.O. as POTUS. After all, he’s all for everyone being equally wealthy (because that’s what socialists want) so I’m sure in support of him you’ll want to share all the extra wealth you have with those of us that can’t afford his “invoice” of “change.”
Let me know where I can send the bill when the IRS starts calling, thanks for being so selfless and more concerned with the welfare of everyone else, it’s so rare these days!

Sep 22, 2008 - 8:24 am 8. Election ‘08 re-defines everything | The Anchoress:

[...] latest piece for Pajamas Media is up. It’s entitled, Obama, Palin and the Meaning of “Change”, and I hope you’ll go read it; I had a lot of fun exploring how this election is chewing up [...]

Sep 22, 2008 - 8:58 am 9. Notice:

What I want to know is do you guys see McCain shifting to the left? After voting with Bush on Most issues or should I say going along with the philosophies.He has shifted not center but farther left than Obama.

Sep 22, 2008 - 9:37 am 10. Jbl:

Is that the latest astroturf? “McCain is farther to the left than Obama?” Cuz it seems odd to be posted here.

Sep 22, 2008 - 9:52 am 11. njcommuter:

“How can you be her age and never have gone to Europe? … Sarah Palin’s travel record is that of a hopeless provincial!”

How can you claim to be a man of the world if you have never stalked, killed, and butchered your own dinner?

At one time, a person who didn’t do this wasn’t fit to marry and have a family.

No, I haven’t–but I don’t claim to be a man of the world.

Sep 22, 2008 - 10:26 am 12. Jeff:

What most people have not notice or fail to notice is that “Change” is coming in this election. But the “Change” is not only being promoted by Obama’s campaign since the beginning, the “Change” is now also in McCain himself, who has seemed to have made a 180 degrees turn in his own transformation. Here are the “Changes” of McCain —

1) McCain was previously against oil drilling in ANWR, Alaska; off the coast of Florida; off the coast of the Gulf of Mexico; and off the coast of California. Now he is for “drill baby drill”.
2) McCain was against Federal regulations of America’s largest financial institutions like Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and AIG. Now, after these financial institutions are collapsing, he is promoting Federal regulations to control them so that this crisis will not happen again. He now wants more Federal regulations of Wall Street altogether. Wouldn’t this be considered as socialism that most conservatives do not want? Also, please do not forget McCain’s past involvement in the Keating Five as an example that his future plans for Federal regulations of financial institutions will not work —

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

3) McCain has said over and over that, “the fundamentals of our economy are strong” in reference to our economy. Now, he states that he was referring to the American workers as being the backbone of our economy? This reference is only made after Obama has contested his refusal to accept that our country is in a financial crisis. Maybe this is McCain’s way of defusing his stance of denial.
4) McCain has stated since the beginning of the Republican campaign that he will fight a good and honest campaign without resorting to dirty politics of using smear tactics. Now, most of the McCain’s campaign ads against Obama are smear campaigns that even The New York Times, The Washington Post, The LA Times, Newsweek, and various other major news agencies have declared as false information using very dirty politics. Most of the Obama’s campaign ads have been on the defense to all of these false accusations by the McCain’s campaign ads.
5) For more changes of McCain, please look at the link below —

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/flipflops

In this election, there are in fact two forms of changes. One form of “Change” is being promoted by a candidate who wants to transform this country for the better, while the other form of “Change” is being promoted by another candidate of his own transformation to capture the hearts of the American public. Which form of “Change” do we want as a country?

Sep 22, 2008 - 10:28 am 13. danviento:

But wait, you forgot everyone’s favorite term:

Feminazi!

I have yet to find a more apt word mash.

Sep 22, 2008 - 10:35 am 14. Sarah:

Dear “Jeff”
“Changing” the word “ideology” to “Change” is not fooling anyone that is a regular on PJM. Once again, please go post elsewhere where your blue kool-aid will be swallowed without asking any questions. I’m trying to help you here, you’re really embarrassing yourself!

Dear PJM readers,
“Jeff” has posted a similar “change” message throughout this site but in his other (even more) ridiculous liberal posts he is touting an “ideology” message in hopes of everyone not noticing that he is spouting the same old sh*t just on a different day. Feel free to call him out on it.

Sep 22, 2008 - 11:01 am 15. Jbl:

Jeff: changing your minds as circumstances change is a good thing. Remember? When Bush wouldn’t change his mind, you guys thought that was a BAD thing. Remember? McCain has reasonably changed his mind. But we see the astroturfing.

Sep 22, 2008 - 11:10 am 16. Woman scolds press re Palin | The Anchoress:

[...] is vile and disgusting, and there was no reason to bring it up. Once could quite easily parody the insulated, elitist cluelessness of the NY Times without ever going there. They went there for a reason. And I hope they get chewed out some more [...]

Sep 22, 2008 - 11:48 am 17. Words have a meaning. « Living IRL:

[...] 22, 2008 Modern Feminism , Modern Liberals , Real Life in America Elizabeth Scalia has a laser-sharp article up at Pajamas Media.  She surveys the media-sphere to show us how the meanings of  certain words [...]

Sep 22, 2008 - 12:10 pm 18. Ed Wallis:

PLEASE IGNORE THE “jeff” TROLL.

Sep 22, 2008 - 12:28 pm 19. Self-hating boomer:

At the risk of invoking Godwin’s law, dare I point out who also talked about “change”?

Sep 22, 2008 - 1:09 pm 20. Jeff:

Sorry folks,

There is no astroturfing here. The American public has a right to hear from both sides and this American feels obligated to point it out to them. It would be a huge injustice for us to repeat disaster again for another 4 more years.

Sep 22, 2008 - 1:10 pm 21. Sarah:

Sorry “Jeff”
The injustice would be for you to keep goin on and on and on…you get the point, about “change” and “ideology” when we can all tell that you are Axelturd fan. If you want to reach the “American public” why don’t you go hang out in front of some unfortunate county’s Republican headquarters and bore them to death with your same old song and dance. At least they would have the opportunity to throw rotten vegetables at you, whereas all of us here that are interested in an opinion (that hasn’t been copy/pasted in about 400 other places) have to put up with your as(s)inine liberal ramblings.
The kind of “change” we would like as PJM readers is for you to admit that you were hired to spread the message of your “messiah” and then go away!
Oh, and if it isn’t too much trouble maybe you could promise to move to Canada when John McCain is elected.
I’m sure that’s the kind of “change” we all could vote for and possibly even be persuaded to pitch in for the moving truck and/or plane ticket.

Sep 22, 2008 - 1:34 pm 22. Jeff:

Sarah,

Shouldn’t you be out there campaigning rather than hanging around in here?

Sep 22, 2008 - 1:49 pm 23. Janet S:

Change doesn’t cost 600 billion dollars. No higher taxes, no voting “present.” Vote for McCain/Palin.

Sep 22, 2008 - 2:02 pm 24. Ed Wallis:

ONE SIDE of this campaign season has FINALLY shown some TESTICULAR FORTITUDE…

http://www.gunbanobama.com/Default.aspx?NavGuid=430d7335-d158-44f5-aab6-bb7d1226f3fa

Sep 22, 2008 - 2:36 pm 25. Ex-fetus:

“Things do not change; we change.”
Henry David Thoreau, Walden (1970)
US Transcendentalist author (1817 – 1862)

Thoreau was wrong, of course. If he could have seen Hiroshima on August the 10, 1945 he would have realized how wrong he was, maybe.

Sep 22, 2008 - 3:26 pm 26. proud elitist:

McCain says “change” and “reform” but does nothing to exemplify it. Except for “I have changed* my opinion many times on issues during my honorless campaign to win the White House in 2008,” or “I want to reform the opinion Americans have of my once having honor to now having none.”

**flip-flopped

Reform/Change Does Not Equal having the Rove 2000 team on your campaign staff and Earmark Queen as your VP mate. Reform/Change does not have Earmark Queen stonewalling an investigation within her own State.

Recall that Republicans championed deregulation, ran the Congress from 1994 – 2006 and the White House from 1980-1992 and 2000-2008. During said period of time no significant oversight of said deregulated financial markets were conducted. McCain (Keating Five Senator; wife $$ tied up with Keating) make some noise in 2005 about the finanical crisis. Of course, that 2005 legislation he made noise over – Fannie and Freddie supported said legislation.

Now, wait a minute, wasn’t Rick Davis (McCain campaign manager) a lobbyist whose clients included F/F during that time?

Dems sat around, did nothing and profited from it. But make no mistake about it, the champions of this culture that has derailed our financial markets was the brainchild of the Republicans and McCain, his buddy Gramm and his campaign staff are part of this culture.

Voting for Obama, they guy who didn’t call his wife a c*nt or trollop. Voting for Biden who championed the Violence Against Women Act.

Sep 22, 2008 - 4:58 pm 27. PTA Mom:

“she’d traveled from a PTA meeting to the governor’s mansion in less than 20 years”

Those out there that don’t think the PTA is a good political proving ground have obviously never been to a PTA meeting.

Sep 22, 2008 - 6:01 pm 28. AST:

This is the first true postmodernist campaign, where words like change, reform, experience and qualified mean two different things at once, and Obama becomes the measure of all things.

I’m reminded of the Apple Macintosh ad in 1984, but this time it’s Sarah Palin running down the aisle and throwing the hammer through the screen.

Sep 22, 2008 - 6:04 pm 29. nohype:

Many years ago I was a graduate student at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Students came from all over the country and the world. The ones that I found most provincial were the women from New York. Others knew that the towns and cities from which they came were not all that important, so were willing to learn about other places. The women from New York thought they came from the center of the universe so really did not care about any other place, and were eager to leave the boonies of Wisconsin to return to New York. I think the attitude that I observed then is still very much alive–those that think they come from the center of the universe are often the most provincial and close-minded people you will ever meet.

Sep 22, 2008 - 7:23 pm 30. john from cinncinati:

CHANGE! your money from your hand to mine. has obama come up with a plan or is he still waiting to hear from the feds, so he can regurgitate. Mccain sounds like obama? they are buckle to buckle right now, so obama has to say something. it sounds strangely like what Mccain is saying.Echooooo, Echoooooo “its ok if John Mccain has said it, i definitely look better saying it” i’m barack obama and i approve of this message. ps. its Bush’s fault

Sep 22, 2008 - 10:17 pm 31. Jeff Weimer:

I’m going to take this one head-on. Jeff, take a look in places other than left-wing blogs or even the MSM – they don’t tell the whole story.

What most people have not notice or fail to notice is that “Change” is coming in this election. But the “Change” is not only being promoted by Obama’s campaign since the beginning, the “Change” is now also in McCain himself, who has seemed to have made a 180 degrees turn in his own transformation. Here are the “Changes” of McCain —

1)McCain was previously against oil drilling in ANWR, Alaska; off the coast of Florida; off the coast of the Gulf of Mexico; and off the coast of California. Now he is for “drill baby drill”.

In answer to this, it’s reasonable to assume that after oil reaching $145 per barrel, a reexamination of priorities was in order. In contrast, Barack Obama openly thought that the high oil prices were just fine, except “they rose too fast”. His proposal would do nothing to ease prices on the oil market – and is fully in line with current policies concerning oil production, which by definition, is not change.

2) McCain was against Federal regulations of America’s largest financial institutions like Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and AIG. Now, after these financial institutions are collapsing, he is promoting Federal regulations to control them so that this crisis will not happen again. He now wants more Federal regulations of Wall Street altogether. Wouldn’t this be considered as socialism that most conservatives do not want?

The President in 2003 and McCain again in 2005 attempted to reform oversight of the FMs, and were stalled in the Senate by Chris Dodd and in the House by Barney Frank. They attempted to rein in the risky lending practices that led directly to this. It wasn’t deregulation that caused this, but direct regulation from Congress to banks and mortgage lenders that restricted their ability to expand unless they could prove they weren’t redlining – they were REQUIRED to loosen their lending rules. My caveat – it was a noble goal, home ownership is one of the single best ways to stabilize shaky communities, and the low crime rates of the last 10 years could be seen to bear this out, in part. The overwhelming majority of these risky loans are still being paid on time, so the idea of relaxing the lending rules was a good one – Bush endorsed it with this “ownership society”. It just went too far and caused the bubble and speculation and predatory lending and let the Democrats in Congress fight any attempts to keep it from the edge.

Also, please do not forget McCain’s past involvement in the Keating Five as an example that his future plans for Federal regulations of financial institutions will not work —

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

From your Wikipedia article:

Democrat Robert S. Bennett, who was the special investigator during the scandal, suggested to the Senate Ethics Committee that it pursue charges against neither McCain nor Glenn, saying of McCain, “that there was no evidence against him.”

And McCain went on to author the McCain/Feingold campaign finance reform bill. Not that I’m a fan, but it shows he learned a lesson and APPLIED it. BTW, some of the transactions that happened last week, BOA buying Merrill Lynch for example, couldn’t have happened without the repeal of the Glass-Steagall act in 1999. Deregulation at its finest.

3)McCain has said over and over that, “the fundamentals of our economy are strong” in reference to our economy. Now, he states that he was referring to the American workers as being the backbone of our economy? This reference is only made after Obama has contested his refusal to accept that our country is in a financial crisis. Maybe this is McCain’s way of defusing his stance of denial.

In a sense he’s right, this is a fiat economy. Meaning, our confidence in it undergirds its success to a significant degree. This is also a credit crisis as of now, but not a general economic crisis yet. It has tied up so much money that it could spill over into the rest of the economy. He may have understated it some, but Obama is grievously overstating it to score political points and whip up support.

4)McCain has stated since the beginning of the Republican campaign that he will fight a good and honest campaign without resorting to dirty politics of using smear tactics. Now, most of the McCain’s campaign ads against Obama are smear campaigns that even The New York Times, The Washington Post, The LA Times, Newsweek, and various other major news agencies have declared as false information using very dirty politics. Most of the Obama’s campaign ads have been on the defense to all of these false accusations by the McCain’s campaign ads.)

He may have pinned a tenuous connection to Raines, but the Washington Post even said he was an advisor, causing them to refute THEMSELVES. The “lipstick on a pig” flap – do you really think Obama wasn’t talking about Palin? He was too cute by half and got caught – and then whined about it. Speaking of whipping it up, how about Obama and Social Security? Even the above august publications had to call BS on that one.

5) For more changes of McCain, please look at the link below — http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/flipflops

If you want to talk flip-flops, how about the significant number Obama has made, especially since clinching the nominations – always with a “I have always said…” He even called the surge “a success” after denying it until it was too obvious. You can’t deny reality, I guess.

He couldn’t even make up his mind (while on vacation!) about the crisis in Georgia. It took him three press releases to come around to the same position John McCain had days earlier. That’s not change, that’s dangerous.

In this election, there are in fact two forms of change. One form of “Change” is being promoted by a candidate who wants to transform this country for the better, while the other form of “Change” is being promoted by another candidate of his own transformation to capture the hearts of the American public. Which form of “Change” do we want as a country?

That’s why the change offered by McCain/Palin is truly better change than that offered by Obama. They fought – publicly – with their own party on issues they could have just gone along with. Palin even quit her partisan job to blow the whistle on corruption in her own party. McCain almost lost this race in the primaries due to his stand on immigration – in distinct opposition to the mandarins of his party. Oh yeah, he literally rammed the surge down the President’s throat, and Bush TOOK it… Now THAT was change even Obama couldn’t deny. Questions, what has Obama done in opposition to his party, based on principle? When has he brought change to the Democrat party? Oh yeah, McCain wants to change government and how it works, Obama wants to change America? Wouldn’t that take a new Constitution? What would it look like?

Sep 23, 2008 - 5:34 am 32. Jeff Weimer:

I’m going to take this one head-on. Jeff, take a look in places other than left-wing blogs or even the MSM.

What most people have not notice or fail to notice is that “Change” is coming in this election. But the “Change” is not only being promoted by Obama’s campaign since the beginning, the “Change” is now also in McCain himself, who has seemed to have made a 180 degrees turn in his own transformation. Here are the “Changes” of McCain —

1)McCain was previously against oil drilling in ANWR, Alaska; off the coast of Florida; off the coast of the Gulf of Mexico; and off the coast of California. Now he is for “drill baby drill”.

In answer to this, it’s reasonable to assume that after oil reaching $145 per barrel, a reexamination of priorities was in order. In contrast, Barack Obama openly thought that the high oil prices were just fine, except “they rose too fast”. His proposal would do nothing to ease prices on the oil market – and is fully in line with current policies concerning oil production, which by definition, is not change.

2) McCain was against Federal regulations of America’s largest financial institutions like Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and AIG. Now, after these financial institutions are collapsing, he is promoting Federal regulations to control them so that this crisis will not happen again. He now wants more Federal regulations of Wall Street altogether. Wouldn’t this be considered as socialism that most conservatives do not want?

The President in 2003 and McCain again in 2005 attempted to reform oversight of the FMs, and were stalled in the Senate by Chris Dodd and in the House by Barney Frank. They attempted to rein in the risky lending practices that led directly to this. It wasn’t deregulation that caused this, but direct regulation from Congress to banks and mortgage lenders that restricted their ability to expand unless they could prove they weren’t redlining – they were REQUIRED to loosen their lending rules. My caveat – it was a noble goal, home ownership is one of the single best ways to stabilize shaky communities, and the low crime rates of the last 10 years could be seen to bear this out, in part. The overwhelming majority of these risky loans are still being paid on time, so the idea of relaxing the lending rules was a good one – Bush endorsed it with this “ownership society”. It just went too far and caused the bubble and speculation and predatory lending and let the Democrats in Congress fight any attempts to keep it from the edge.

Also, please do not forget McCain’s past involvement in the Keating Five as an example that his future plans for Federal regulations of financial institutions will not work —

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

From your Wikipedia article:

Democrat Robert S. Bennett, who was the special investigator during the scandal, suggested to the Senate Ethics Committee that it pursue charges against neither McCain nor Glenn, saying of McCain, “that there was no evidence against him.”

And McCain went on to author the McCain/Feingold campaign finance reform bill. Not that I’m a fan, but it shows he learned a lesson and APPLIED it. BTW, some of the transactions that happened last week, BOA buying Merrill Lynch for example, couldn’t have happened without the repeal of the Glass-Steagall act in 1999. Deregulation at its finest.

3)McCain has said over and over that, “the fundamentals of our economy are strong” in reference to our economy. Now, he states that he was referring to the American workers as being the backbone of our economy? This reference is only made after Obama has contested his refusal to accept that our country is in a financial crisis. Maybe this is McCain’s way of defusing his stance of denial.

In a sense he’s right, this is a fiat economy. Meaning, our confidence in it undergirds its success to a significant degree. This is also a credit crisis as of now, but not a general economic crisis yet. It has tied up so much money that it could spill over into the rest of the economy. He may have understated it some, but Obama is grievously overstating it to score political points and whip up support.

4)McCain has stated since the beginning of the Republican campaign that he will fight a good and honest campaign without resorting to dirty politics of using smear tactics. Now, most of the McCain’s campaign ads against Obama are smear campaigns that even The New York Times, The Washington Post, The LA Times, Newsweek, and various other major news agencies have declared as false information using very dirty politics. Most of the Obama’s campaign ads have been on the defense to all of these false accusations by the McCain’s campaign ads.)

He may have pinned a tenuous connection to Raines, but the Washington Post even said he was an advisor, causing them to refute THEMSELVES. The “lipstick on a pig” flap – do you really think Obama wasn’t talking about Palin? He was too cute by half and got caught – and then whined about it. Speaking of whipping it up, how about Obama and Social Security? Even the above august publications had to call BS on that one.

5) For more changes of McCain, please look at the link below — http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/flipflops

If you want to talk flip-flops, how about the significant number Obama has made, especially since clinching the nominations – always with a “I have always said…” He even called the surge “a success” after denying it until it was too obvious. You can’t deny reality, I guess.

He couldn’t even make up his mind (while on vacation!) about the crisis in Georgia. It took him three press releases to come around to the same position John McCain had days earlier. That’s not change, that’s dangerous.

In this election, there are in fact two forms of change. One form of “Change” is being promoted by a candidate who wants to transform this country for the better, while the other form of “Change” is being promoted by another candidate of his own transformation to capture the hearts of the American public. Which form of “Change” do we want as a country?

That’s why the change offered by McCain/Palin is truly better change than that offered by Obama. They fought – publicly – with their own party on issues they could have just gone along with. Palin even quit her partisan job to blow the whistle on corruption in her own party. McCain almost lost this race in the primaries due to his stand on immigration – in distinct opposition to the mandarins of his party. Oh yeah, he literally rammed the surge down the President’s throat, and Bush TOOK it… Now THAT was change even Obama couldn’t deny. Questions, what has Obama done in opposition to his party, based on principle? When has he brought change to the Democrat party? Oh yeah, McCain wants to change government and how it works, Obama wants to change America? Wouldn’t that take a new Constitution? What would it look like?
Category: Change, Election, Mccain, Obama
ShareThisSphere: Related Content

Sep 23, 2008 - 6:08 am 33. Sarah:

“Jeff”
What a cute and imaginative response, I expected nothing less of you. *yawn* While I would consider it an amazing honor to serve my country in such a capacity I have about 11 more years before I reach the age requirement, keep an eye out for me in 2019 though! In the meantime, feel free to keep posting everything that you want to “change” about America and I’ll make sure to vote the opposite.
My version of “campaigning” at present is to educate everyone I can about how detrimental it would be to the America that we know and love for B.O. to be POTUS. I’m sure I’m not the only one that would choose “the same” over a sexist, terrorist loving, mob-connected talking head!
Considering that you feel so free to wax eloquent (repeditively) every chance you get about what could be done differently, I’d like to know how you are making a difference in your local political offices since you feel so strongly about the direction our country is headed.

Sep 23, 2008 - 6:17 am 34. Ex-fetus:

“McCain was against Federal regulations of America’s largest financial institutions like Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and AIG.”

Factually inaccurate, sir. Not sure if your intent was to deceive, or if you just swallowed some propaganda and are now regurgitating it. Here are the facts;

http://www.floppingaces.net/2008/09/16/democrats-blocked-financial-reforms-that-mccain-and-gop-proposed-in-2005/

All the links you need are there. I do disagree with his conclusions.

“If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.”
– John McCain, May 25, 2006

Big Mac predicted this and was part of a bi-partisan solution. Unfortunately, The number of Congress critters taking bribes was just as bi-partisan and much larger. So now the ‘chicken has come home to roost’ as we say down here. ‘Time to pay the piper’ as they say up north.

“In the year 2000 Congressman Richard Baker (R-La.) then the chairman of the House subcommittee that had jurisdiction over Fannie and Freddie introduced legislation to more tightly regulate the mortgage giants. The bill never saw the light of day. Congresspersons from both parties receive contributions from Fan & Fred (the list) and collectively they spent $174 million lobbying Congress the last ten years.”

While Flopping Aces is wrong to try and blame this on the Democrats, you are also wrong in laying it at McCain’s feet. Both of you are being Partisan, which is OK, since that is the entire point in a bicameral system.
Considering that Since McCain was tried and acquitted in the Keating Five case (by the Senate ethics committee. As a sitting Senator, he is above the Law and cannot be arrested) and ended up being the star witness for the prosecution at the criminal trial.
“In the end, McCain received only a mild rebuke from the Ethics Committee for exercising “poor judgment” for intervening with the federal regulators on behalf of Keating. Still, he felt tarred by the affair.

“The appearance of it was wrong,” McCain said. “It’s a wrong appearance when a group of senators appear in a meeting with a group of regulators because it conveys the impression of undue and improper influence. And it was the wrong thing to do.”

McCain noted that Bennett, the independent counsel, recommended that McCain and Glenn be dropped from the investigation.

“For the first time in history, the Ethics Committee overruled the recommendation of the independent counsel,” McCain said. For his part, DeConcini is critical of McCain’s role in the affair. The two senators never were particularly cozy, and the stress of the public scrutiny worsened their relations.”

From here;
http://www.azcentral.com/news/specials/mccain/articles/0301mccainbio-chapter7.html

Your wikipedia is biased, of course. This sentence; “All five of the senators involved served out their terms.” should read, “none of the Senators were impeached.”
’served out their terms’ is hinting of prison. ‘completed their terms’ would have been neutral, which I assume is why Wikipedia didn’t use it.

Regardless, the close brush with political death left it’s mark on Senator McCain and he has flown the straight and narrow ever since. He is a leader in the anti-corruption effort ( what little there is) in Congress.
Ohhhh……BAAMA, on the other hand is the golden child of the second most corrupt political machine in American history.

So the election is between two Senators, one who predicted and acted properly to two of the most serious crisis in American history. The other voted ‘present’ almost 130 times while a State Senator. Think about that when you draw the curtian closed on your voting booth. Do you want the guy who makes the tough call and gets it right, or the guy who votes “Present”.

Sep 23, 2008 - 6:23 am 35. always right:

Anchoress,

Bravo. Much better writing this time than the previous ‘lecture’ re: finding a nice thing to say about Pelosi.

What was the point of saying something nice (about Pelosi) and faking it? I thought the Catholic school taught not to outright lie.

Sep 23, 2008 - 11:36 am 36. Palin, Rape Kits, High-School, & More | The Anchoress:

[...] of course, changing the meaning of everything if Palin does not fit your [...]

Sep 24, 2008 - 7:56 am 37. Javelin:

Feminazi, hmmm, who coined that one?

Sep 24, 2008 - 8:05 pm 38. Debate on Oct 15th, 2008 | Grizzly Groundswell:

[...] is all that going to do for us? He does not have any good answers to anything! All his talk about hope(less) change has no substance. McCain asks him about Ayers the Terrorist and no real answer given which tells me [...]

Oct 16, 2008 - 6:14 am 39. The Anchoress — A First Things Blog:

[...] Our “sophisticated” and “world-traveled” president is, in fact, coming from a very provincial, self-satisfied and narrow place. The depths of his introspection leads Obama to conclude about himself that he doesn’t like [...]

Jul 6, 2009 - 10:39 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: