Donny's Ramblings

How Do You Feel About Palin’s Latest Interviews?

64 Comments

After all the controversy that has been stirred up by the political posts I’ve made recently, I’d really like to give it a break.  The problem is that I have enough time on my hands to actually listen to the candidates speak, and Sarah Palin is really baffling to me.   I can’t help but write about her.

When she was first introduced I thought she was a good choice for McCain.  Her first speech was fiery.  She had a list of “accomplishments” and was said to have fought the “good ol’ boy network”.  But it turns out those accomplishments aren’t what they were portrayed to be.  She didn’t, for example, oppose the “Bridge to Nowhere” until after it was a dead issue.  She had, in fact, been in favor of it at the beginning.

After seeing her latest interviews I’m baffled that she’s even considered a candidate for Vice President.  Sure, she’s a “good person”.  Sure, she’s “one of us”.  And I’m positive she was great in the PTA.  But she doesn’t belong in this country’s second most powerful office.

Did you see her interview with Katie Couric?  She is in WAY OVER HER HEAD.  She tries to sound intelligent on issues, but instead makes herself look very foolish.

When asked how living in the state closest to Russia gave her foreign-policy experience, Palin responded thus:

“It’s very important when you consider even national-security issues with Russia as Putin rears his head and comes into the airspace of the United States of America. Where—where do they go? It’s Alaska. It’s just right over the border. It is from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there. They are right next to—to our state.”

Sarah publicly stated that being sandwiched between Russia and Canada gave her foreign policy experience.  The exact quote was, “Our next door neighbors are foreign countries”.  Puhleeze!  Tell me you’re joking, Sarah!  Unfortunately, she wasn’t joking.  If you don’t believe me, click here to watch for yourself (you’ll have to watch a 15 second commercial first).

I think John McCain needs to apologize to her for bringing her into this race.  The woman who would have been known as a decent Governor of the State of Alaska will now be forever remembered as the butt of “stupid politician” jokes.

Even conservatives are starting to publicly state she isn’t the right person for the job.  Read Kathleen Parker’s column:  Kathleen Parker:  The Palin Problem

Some quotes from this article:

Prominent conservative columnist Kathleen Parker, an early supporter of Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin, said Friday recent interviews have shown the Alaska governor is “out of her league” and should leave the GOP presidential ticket for the good of the party.

It was fun while it lasted,” Parker writes. “Palin’s recent interviews with Charles Gibson, Sean Hannity, and now Katie Couric have all revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who is clearly out of her league.

“If BS were currency, Palin could bail out Wall Street herself,” Parker also writes. “If Palin were a man, we’d all be guffawing, just as we do every time Joe Biden tickles the back of his throat with his toes. But because she’s a woman — and the first ever on a Republican presidential ticket — we are reluctant to say what is painfully true.”

Parker’s comments follow those by prominent conservatives David Brooks, George Will, and David Frum who have all publicly questioned Palin’s readiness to be vice president.

“Sarah Palin has many virtues,” Brooks wrote in a recent column. “If you wanted someone to destroy a corrupt establishment, she’d be your woman. But the constructive act of governance is another matter. She has not been engaged in national issues, does not have a repertoire of historic patterns and, like President Bush, she seems to compensate for her lack of experience with brashness and excessive decisiveness.”

Palin filibusters. She repeats words, filling space with deadwood. Cut the verbiage and there’s not much content there.

Saturday Night Live, as you know, often pokes fun at candidates.  I get a laugh at such skits.  Have you seen the last skit poking fun at Sarah Palin?  At one point, instead of making up amusing dialogue, Sarah is quoted word for word because what she said was so absurd a writer wasn’t needed to make it funny.

A few more stories on the Palin interviews (PLEASE do yourself a favor and read them):

How can anyone defend this decision?  Stubborn allegiance to the Republican Party, perhaps?  Please enlighten me.

64 thoughts on “How Do You Feel About Palin’s Latest Interviews?

  1. DS,

    The author was rather crude in the second half of his second paragraph, and I’m sure some readers will not like that, but I appreciated his bluntness in the rest of the article and posted a link to it on a message board where we’ve been discussing Sarah Palin.

    Thanks.

  2. DS,

    The author was rather crude in the second half of his second paragraph, and I’m sure some readers will not like that, but I appreciated his bluntness in the rest of the article and posted a link to it on a message board where we’ve been discussing Sarah Palin.

    Thanks.

  3. Was she a good choice?

    On day one I thought so.

    Do I truly think so now?

    No, I don’t. But I don’t like Obama either.

    So where does that leave me?

    I will say Obama was wise in choosing someone with experience, esp foreign policy experience, as his running mate.

  4. Was she a good choice?

    On day one I thought so.

    Do I truly think so now?

    No, I don’t. But I don’t like Obama either.

    So where does that leave me?

    I will say Obama was wise in choosing someone with experience, esp foreign policy experience, as his running mate.

  5. I feel just like Val does (in her comment above mine). I also noticed that Palin was quoted word for word in sections of the SNL interview when I watched it Sat. night. That was really kind of interesting. And hilarious.

    FIne.

    I may just have to write in my candidate when I vote. It’s gonna be Hillary. Or maybe I just won’t vote this time. And not feel bad about it.

    I couldn’t get past the 2nd paragraph of the article link posted in the first comment. I clicked on it before I read your comment, Donny. After his crudeness, anything else–even remotely intelligent–he may have said would have been easily discredited in my mind.

  6. I feel just like Val does (in her comment above mine). I also noticed that Palin was quoted word for word in sections of the SNL interview when I watched it Sat. night. That was really kind of interesting. And hilarious.

    FIne.

    I may just have to write in my candidate when I vote. It’s gonna be Hillary. Or maybe I just won’t vote this time. And not feel bad about it.

    I couldn’t get past the 2nd paragraph of the article link posted in the first comment. I clicked on it before I read your comment, Donny. After his crudeness, anything else–even remotely intelligent–he may have said would have been easily discredited in my mind.

  7. Amen! Celeste. The author claimed to be such an intellegent fella and was as crude as a scum bag….go figure – but I didn’t think he had much to say of worth after that explosion of filth!

  8. Amen! Celeste. The author claimed to be such an intellegent fella and was as crude as a scum bag….go figure – but I didn’t think he had much to say of worth after that explosion of filth!

  9. sorry to have misspelled intelligent….duh….

  10. sorry to have misspelled intelligent….duh….

  11. He was very crude, Jean. There was no reason to go to that level. I do, however, think he makes some good points with the rest of his column, albeit very bluntly (I like blunt):

    Now, I want to be clear and speak directly to those of you who LOVED that Palin interview. You’re an idiot. I mean that. This is not one of those cases where we’re going to agree to disagree. This isn’t one of those situations where we debate it passionately and then walk away thinking that the other guy is wrong but argued well. I’m not going to think of you as a thoughtful but misguided person with different ideas who still really cares about the country and the world. No, sorry, not this time. This time, if you watched that interview and weren’t scared out of your freakin’ mind, then you’re mentally ill, mentally disabled, or mentally disturbed. What you are NOT is responsible, informed, curious, thoughtful, mature, educated, empathetic, or remotely serious. I mean it.

    But I like to think that anyone can change.

    Stop voting for people you want to have a beer with. Stop voting for folksy. Stop voting for people who remind you of your neighbor. Stop voting for the ideologically intransigent, the staggeringly ignorant, and the blazingly incompetent.

    Vote for someone smarter than you. Vote for someone who inspires you. Vote for someone who has not only traveled the world but who has also shown a deep understanding and compassion for it. The stakes are real and they’re terrifyingly high. This election matters. It matters. It really matters. Let me say that one more time. This. Really. Matters.

  12. He was very crude, Jean. There was no reason to go to that level. I do, however, think he makes some good points with the rest of his column, albeit very bluntly (I like blunt):

    Now, I want to be clear and speak directly to those of you who LOVED that Palin interview. You’re an idiot. I mean that. This is not one of those cases where we’re going to agree to disagree. This isn’t one of those situations where we debate it passionately and then walk away thinking that the other guy is wrong but argued well. I’m not going to think of you as a thoughtful but misguided person with different ideas who still really cares about the country and the world. No, sorry, not this time. This time, if you watched that interview and weren’t scared out of your freakin’ mind, then you’re mentally ill, mentally disabled, or mentally disturbed. What you are NOT is responsible, informed, curious, thoughtful, mature, educated, empathetic, or remotely serious. I mean it.

    But I like to think that anyone can change.

    Stop voting for people you want to have a beer with. Stop voting for folksy. Stop voting for people who remind you of your neighbor. Stop voting for the ideologically intransigent, the staggeringly ignorant, and the blazingly incompetent.

    Vote for someone smarter than you. Vote for someone who inspires you. Vote for someone who has not only traveled the world but who has also shown a deep understanding and compassion for it. The stakes are real and they’re terrifyingly high. This election matters. It matters. It really matters. Let me say that one more time. This. Really. Matters.

  13. I am a deeply committed Christian. I am sure Sarah Pallin is a person whose beliefs and accomplishments I would respect, were I to meet her in church or even need a mayor for my town. But the thought of her possibly becoming leader of the free world scares me to death.

    I am amazed at the logic my evangelical brothers and sisters are willing to suspend when it comes to Pallin. Have we lost our minds, people? I am afraid that some of us evangelicals are too in love with the idea of having someone in the white house that sounds like us. Once we hear someone loves Jesus (in a conservative language we relate to), nothing else matters.

    My pastor used to say that if he was going to have brain surgery, he’d love to have a Christian doctor, but if he had to choose between an lousy surgeon who was a believer and an excellent surgeon, he’d take the excellent surgeon. You would not ask a premed student to perform a brain operation, no matter how much he loved Jesus.

    The truth is Sarah Pallin is just a small-town girl who rose up to become a local leader. She may be feisty and have strong conservative opinions, but that does not qualify her to be the leader of the third world. (Have we not learned anything these last 8 years?) Her lack of education, political experience, and world exposure simply leave her unqualified for the job.

    Please, conservative evangelical Christians of American — let’s have enough humility and intellectual integrity to admit when a mistake has been made. Those Katie Couric interviews stand alone. (It’s true — most of that SNL skit came DIRECTLY from the real interview!!!). Let us not pretend that this “naked emperor” is wearing clothes when she clearly is not!!!

  14. I am a deeply committed Christian. I am sure Sarah Pallin is a person whose beliefs and accomplishments I would respect, were I to meet her in church or even need a mayor for my town. But the thought of her possibly becoming leader of the free world scares me to death.

    I am amazed at the logic my evangelical brothers and sisters are willing to suspend when it comes to Pallin. Have we lost our minds, people? I am afraid that some of us evangelicals are too in love with the idea of having someone in the white house that sounds like us. Once we hear someone loves Jesus (in a conservative language we relate to), nothing else matters.

    My pastor used to say that if he was going to have brain surgery, he’d love to have a Christian doctor, but if he had to choose between an lousy surgeon who was a believer and an excellent surgeon, he’d take the excellent surgeon. You would not ask a premed student to perform a brain operation, no matter how much he loved Jesus.

    The truth is Sarah Pallin is just a small-town girl who rose up to become a local leader. She may be feisty and have strong conservative opinions, but that does not qualify her to be the leader of the third world. (Have we not learned anything these last 8 years?) Her lack of education, political experience, and world exposure simply leave her unqualified for the job.

    Please, conservative evangelical Christians of American — let’s have enough humility and intellectual integrity to admit when a mistake has been made. Those Katie Couric interviews stand alone. (It’s true — most of that SNL skit came DIRECTLY from the real interview!!!). Let us not pretend that this “naked emperor” is wearing clothes when she clearly is not!!!

  15. Donny, I can’t help but believe absolutely totally that the “wisdom” of this age is foolishness in God’s eyes. I’d rather have His wisdom than anything the world has to offer. It’s a discernment issue rather than where the person was educated.

    And, yes, I read the rest of his dialog; and I agree this election really matters….

    And I DON’T like being called an idiot even if I just might happed to be one! It’s childish to name call like that. I can’t imagine who is impressed with it.

  16. Donny, I can’t help but believe absolutely totally that the “wisdom” of this age is foolishness in God’s eyes. I’d rather have His wisdom than anything the world has to offer. It’s a discernment issue rather than where the person was educated.

    And, yes, I read the rest of his dialog; and I agree this election really matters….

    And I DON’T like being called an idiot even if I just might happed to be one! It’s childish to name call like that. I can’t imagine who is impressed with it.

  17. Jean,

    Are you even paying attention to the things Sarah Palin has been saying? Seriously!

    Please tell me that your “discernment” isn’t telling you she’s ready for this job…

  18. Jean,

    Are you even paying attention to the things Sarah Palin has been saying? Seriously!

    Please tell me that your “discernment” isn’t telling you she’s ready for this job…

  19. For a bit of comic relief, check out the latest SNL skit:

    http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/couric-palin-open/704042/

    As I mentioned before, the sad thing is that parts of this video aren’t made up… they actually quote Palin word for word (hint: pay attention to the part where she talks about the $700 billion bailout and then compare it to what Sarah actually said – and also the part about her foreign policy experience).

  20. For a bit of comic relief, check out the latest SNL skit:

    http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/couric-palin-open/704042/

    As I mentioned before, the sad thing is that parts of this video aren’t made up… they actually quote Palin word for word (hint: pay attention to the part where she talks about the $700 billion bailout and then compare it to what Sarah actually said – and also the part about her foreign policy experience).

  21. Donny, SNL, I’m sure, made fun of Obama and his many stupidities too. And yes, I am listening. I don’t know why you’re so worried about a VP candidate when the Presidential one is just an unqualified.

    All in the perception, isn’t it.

  22. Donny, SNL, I’m sure, made fun of Obama and his many stupidities too. And yes, I am listening. I don’t know why you’re so worried about a VP candidate when the Presidential one is just an unqualified.

    All in the perception, isn’t it.

  23. Jean,

    Yes, let’s look at Barack Obama:

    * His days as a “community organizer” were in the late 80s. That’s not a bad place for a young 20-something man to start.

    * Obama’s undergraduate degree comes from Columbia University and his graduate degree from Harvard Law School. Ivy league!

    * He taught Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago Law School for 12 years.

    * He worked for a 12-attorney law firm specializing in civil rights litigation and neighborhood economic development for 11 years.

    * Even from his 20s, Obama’s goal was to work in Politics. He’s been preparing for this job most of his life.

    * He was a state Senator for almost 8 years

    * He has been a US Senator for almost 4 years now, where he held assignments on the Senate Committees for Foreign Relations, Environment and Public Works and Veterans’ Affairs.

    His resumé shows me a man who has enough experience to know what he’s doing, yet without being a jaded politician. He’s a breath of fresh air, yet as capable as his opponent to lead the country.

  24. Jean,

    Yes, let’s look at Barack Obama:

    * His days as a “community organizer” were in the late 80s. That’s not a bad place for a young 20-something man to start.

    * Obama’s undergraduate degree comes from Columbia University and his graduate degree from Harvard Law School. Ivy league!

    * He taught Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago Law School for 12 years.

    * He worked for a 12-attorney law firm specializing in civil rights litigation and neighborhood economic development for 11 years.

    * Even from his 20s, Obama’s goal was to work in Politics. He’s been preparing for this job most of his life.

    * He was a state Senator for almost 8 years

    * He has been a US Senator for almost 4 years now, where he held assignments on the Senate Committees for Foreign Relations, Environment and Public Works and Veterans’ Affairs.

    His resumé shows me a man who has enough experience to know what he’s doing, yet without being a jaded politician. He’s a breath of fresh air, yet as capable as his opponent to lead the country.

  25. I think the upcoming vp debate will give us a better idea on how capable she is or isnt. Lets not forget the gaffs that Biden has repeated lately. On another note since the economy seems to be the biggest issue did anyone take a look at the congressional hearings back in 05 or 06 where it is in the congressional record that McCain warned of these problems if congress didnt take action against fannie/freddie? Its interesting to see who blocked those attempts then to regulate it. It was the democrats who were in control, Dodd especially. I fully think Bush was asleep at the wheel and only worried about Iraq and should have stepped in also however when the democrats are blaming Bush only they are just as at fault. It did give me a lot more confidence in McCain and the economy though to learn he saw this coming and spoke out against it long ago.

  26. I think the upcoming vp debate will give us a better idea on how capable she is or isnt. Lets not forget the gaffs that Biden has repeated lately. On another note since the economy seems to be the biggest issue did anyone take a look at the congressional hearings back in 05 or 06 where it is in the congressional record that McCain warned of these problems if congress didnt take action against fannie/freddie? Its interesting to see who blocked those attempts then to regulate it. It was the democrats who were in control, Dodd especially. I fully think Bush was asleep at the wheel and only worried about Iraq and should have stepped in also however when the democrats are blaming Bush only they are just as at fault. It did give me a lot more confidence in McCain and the economy though to learn he saw this coming and spoke out against it long ago.

  27. Donny, I have eleven very good reasons for voting for McCain this election. Because of these eleven reasons, I am voting to try and stop the downward spiral of this nation into more socialism via not only the Reps, but the Dems more so.

    These eleven reasons are seven of my own grambabies and four of my brothers’ grambabies, all eight and under. The future for them looks sadly dim in the eyes of the world. In the Lord, there’s no worry, but I still will vote for the less socialistic party.

  28. Donny, I have eleven very good reasons for voting for McCain this election. Because of these eleven reasons, I am voting to try and stop the downward spiral of this nation into more socialism via not only the Reps, but the Dems more so.

    These eleven reasons are seven of my own grambabies and four of my brothers’ grambabies, all eight and under. The future for them looks sadly dim in the eyes of the world. In the Lord, there’s no worry, but I still will vote for the less socialistic party.

  29. Jean,

    Your eleven reasons are beautiful!

    As for the socialist comment… you don’t think it’s socialist to want to take over $700 billion in bad debt? I can’t think of anything more socialist, and leading the way down that path is the party you’ve decided to vote for, the party I see as a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

  30. Jean,

    Your eleven reasons are beautiful!

    As for the socialist comment… you don’t think it’s socialist to want to take over $700 billion in bad debt? I can’t think of anything more socialist, and leading the way down that path is the party you’ve decided to vote for, the party I see as a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

  31. Of course, it’s socialistic to bail out a government entitiy – started by the Dems, I might point out! And as I’ve said numerous times, the Reps are LESS socialistic than the Dems, thus my vote. We are in a mess, no debate!

    I think my eleven reasons are beautiful too! Thanks!!

  32. Of course, it’s socialistic to bail out a government entitiy – started by the Dems, I might point out! And as I’ve said numerous times, the Reps are LESS socialistic than the Dems, thus my vote. We are in a mess, no debate!

    I think my eleven reasons are beautiful too! Thanks!!

  33. DT,

    McCain did NOT see this coming. Want proof? Listen to him talk about it in person:

  34. DT,

    McCain did NOT see this coming. Want proof? Listen to him talk about it in person:

  35. Jean,

    Started by the Dems? Where have you been getting your information?

  36. Jean,

    Started by the Dems? Where have you been getting your information?

  37. Thats a soundbite that isnt in context. I dont think anybody anticipated things being as bad as they were or as he said thought the dot.com would be like it was. However it is in the congressional record and you can check it where he warned about the need to regulate fannie/freddie that they were out of control. Here is a link to what he said and how his attempts at reform were shot down by Chris Dodd the chair of the banking committee. Also, Keep in mind Raines who is Obama’s advisor was at the helm when the accounting scandals happened.
    http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/17/mccains-attempt-to-fix-fannie-mae-freddie-mac-in-2005/

  38. Thats a soundbite that isnt in context. I dont think anybody anticipated things being as bad as they were or as he said thought the dot.com would be like it was. However it is in the congressional record and you can check it where he warned about the need to regulate fannie/freddie that they were out of control. Here is a link to what he said and how his attempts at reform were shot down by Chris Dodd the chair of the banking committee. Also, Keep in mind Raines who is Obama’s advisor was at the helm when the accounting scandals happened.
    http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/17/mccains-attempt-to-fix-fannie-mae-freddie-mac-in-2005/

  39. Looks like DT has found the same info I’ve heard. Thanks, DT!

    You don’t think Clinton would be out there shouting his White House is responsible for Fannie and Freddie now, do you?

  40. Looks like DT has found the same info I’ve heard. Thanks, DT!

    You don’t think Clinton would be out there shouting his White House is responsible for Fannie and Freddie now, do you?

  41. Last week at a coffee shop here in town I sat down with a person I greatly respect. Because of his position, I can’t say who he is. But the conversation we had was quite interesting.

    He says Bill Clinton began the path toward this economic crisis (this was before Clinton publicly hinted at responsibility). How did Bill do this? By passing legislation leaning on the banks to finance people who should never have received credit otherwise, the “underprivileged”, etc.

    “So,” I asked, “What you’re saying is that the trillion dollar surplus he left us with was actually inflated value? It wasn’t real money?”

    “Exactly,” he replied. “Housing prices were driven up because of the law of supply and demand. Artificial equity allowed existing homeowners to borrow money they shouldn’t have been able to borrow. The surplus was comprised of fake money, yes.”

    “Interesting. Where can I read more about this?” He promised to send a link via email, which he did, and then in a follow up conversation just last night, I asked via email, “If this current crisis was caused by Clinton, as we discussed, Republicans had a whole lot of years to fix it. But they didn’t. Why is that?”

    His response came quickly, “First, you need to be aware, that no matter which party has a majority, it requires 60% to pass a bill through the Senate. Even when Republicans were in the majority [in the House], they still didn’t control the Senate.

    “Second, even Bill Clinton admits that it was Democrats who blocked reform of Fannie and Freddie.” To confirm this, he sent me to this video on Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YHTzi6nRUE

    “Third, check out this video of House hearings years ago; every Democrat is saying, ‘Problems? Fannie ain’t got no problems.’ Every Republican is saying, ‘This is terrible, and we have to fix it, or we’re headed for disaster.’ This was 4 years ago.” The link he sent to me was this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

    “Fourth,” he continued, “John McCain sponsored legislation in 2005 and fought for it in 2006 that would have placed regulation in place. Here’s the detail from the non-partisan Gov Track site,” he replied, sending this link.

    “I will admit that there are probably some liberal Republicans whose hands are dirty with this. But the great bulk is on the other side, and even Bill Clinton admits it,” he continued. “McCain has fought this for years, along with other Repubs. The Dems have blocked reform time and time again. Barney Frank is the chief sinner… and a massive hypocrite on this stuff.”

    It was quite a conversation, and has given me much to investigate…

  42. Last week at a coffee shop here in town I sat down with a person I greatly respect. Because of his position, I can’t say who he is. But the conversation we had was quite interesting.

    He says Bill Clinton began the path toward this economic crisis (this was before Clinton publicly hinted at responsibility). How did Bill do this? By passing legislation leaning on the banks to finance people who should never have received credit otherwise, the “underprivileged”, etc.

    “So,” I asked, “What you’re saying is that the trillion dollar surplus he left us with was actually inflated value? It wasn’t real money?”

    “Exactly,” he replied. “Housing prices were driven up because of the law of supply and demand. Artificial equity allowed existing homeowners to borrow money they shouldn’t have been able to borrow. The surplus was comprised of fake money, yes.”

    “Interesting. Where can I read more about this?” He promised to send a link via email, which he did, and then in a follow up conversation just last night, I asked via email, “If this current crisis was caused by Clinton, as we discussed, Republicans had a whole lot of years to fix it. But they didn’t. Why is that?”

    His response came quickly, “First, you need to be aware, that no matter which party has a majority, it requires 60% to pass a bill through the Senate. Even when Republicans were in the majority [in the House], they still didn’t control the Senate.

    “Second, even Bill Clinton admits that it was Democrats who blocked reform of Fannie and Freddie.” To confirm this, he sent me to this video on Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YHTzi6nRUE

    “Third, check out this video of House hearings years ago; every Democrat is saying, ‘Problems? Fannie ain’t got no problems.’ Every Republican is saying, ‘This is terrible, and we have to fix it, or we’re headed for disaster.’ This was 4 years ago.” The link he sent to me was this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

    “Fourth,” he continued, “John McCain sponsored legislation in 2005 and fought for it in 2006 that would have placed regulation in place. Here’s the detail from the non-partisan Gov Track site,” he replied, sending this link.

    “I will admit that there are probably some liberal Republicans whose hands are dirty with this. But the great bulk is on the other side, and even Bill Clinton admits it,” he continued. “McCain has fought this for years, along with other Repubs. The Dems have blocked reform time and time again. Barney Frank is the chief sinner… and a massive hypocrite on this stuff.”

    It was quite a conversation, and has given me much to investigate…

  43. wow, we are all very passionate with our opinions, aren’t we? 🙂

    here is mine, for what it is worth:

    I do not think Obama has the foreign policy experience or wisdom necessary to be president.

    But I do not think McCain will do much domestically- I was certainly hoping for more during the debate than just cutting spending and going after earmarks.

    I now think both VP candidates are somewhat of a joke, although Biden has more experience and feels much more like a potential Pres than Palin. I am looking forward to the debate tomorrow night.

    I have always voted Republican and even campaigned for Bush in the last election. Yes, you may start throwing rocks at me now…

    I do not really appreciate the socialistic slant of Obama’s economic plans. Is it any more socialistic than the bailout? Socialism is socialism, and I don’t like either of them.

    I admire McCain’s personality, his integrity. I do agree with you Donny that McCain was not doing Palin any favors in choosing her. She IS in over her head.

    But just for the record, Obama says stupid stuff too. There is a video of him talking at a town hall meeting about all the states he has visited during campaigning, and so far he said he has visited 57, but he has not been to Alaska or Hawaii yet. Yes, that was 57 states. Either he was very tired, or Ivy League schools do not teach geography anymore. 🙂

  44. wow, we are all very passionate with our opinions, aren’t we? 🙂

    here is mine, for what it is worth:

    I do not think Obama has the foreign policy experience or wisdom necessary to be president.

    But I do not think McCain will do much domestically- I was certainly hoping for more during the debate than just cutting spending and going after earmarks.

    I now think both VP candidates are somewhat of a joke, although Biden has more experience and feels much more like a potential Pres than Palin. I am looking forward to the debate tomorrow night.

    I have always voted Republican and even campaigned for Bush in the last election. Yes, you may start throwing rocks at me now…

    I do not really appreciate the socialistic slant of Obama’s economic plans. Is it any more socialistic than the bailout? Socialism is socialism, and I don’t like either of them.

    I admire McCain’s personality, his integrity. I do agree with you Donny that McCain was not doing Palin any favors in choosing her. She IS in over her head.

    But just for the record, Obama says stupid stuff too. There is a video of him talking at a town hall meeting about all the states he has visited during campaigning, and so far he said he has visited 57, but he has not been to Alaska or Hawaii yet. Yes, that was 57 states. Either he was very tired, or Ivy League schools do not teach geography anymore. 🙂

  45. I think I’ll vote for the Squarepants / Starfish ticket. They’ve done quite a bit to turn around Bikini Bottoms economy.

  46. I think I’ll vote for the Squarepants / Starfish ticket. They’ve done quite a bit to turn around Bikini Bottoms economy.

  47. Glad to see the truth is finally surfacing on this issue. I dont blame Clinton for this mess either, his general plan of making home ownership more accessible was a good idea that if properly executed would not have caused this mess. It did in fact help many millions of people own a home who were deserving. What happened and where the failure was in the greed of the raines and johnsons and those senators who were in their back pocket who ignored common sense and allowed them to manipulate the system for their own gain. The housing crisis was not caused by low down payment loans or even lowering the credit score standards, it was caused when they started ignorning common sense to line their pocketbooks by doing stated income loans, not verifying any income, allowing interest only loans etc that allowed people to purchase homes above their means. There is nothing wrong with purchasing a home at 100% even if you have had some credit issues as long as your income supports it. Foreclosures were caused by the adjustable rates, interest only and stated income loans that allowed people to get in over their head.
    What is most troubling is that Obama was in their pocket more than anyone else in his short time and if you dont believe that just look at him having Raines and Johnson as advisors. Also, the bailout or rescue planned proposed basically was also filled with fluff for groups like acorn etc with hidden spending when the govt received taxpayer money back. Personally I support them coming up with legislation that would not buy the bad loans(after all how can the govt keep track and service them) but instead they would get preferred stock in the company with guarantees of being the first paid back and having to be paid back before ceo bonuses. Also, was anyone else as disgusted by Pelosi and her actions? Can anyone be more out of touch than her? Or the parade of people on tv later blaming the 63 I think it was republicans who voted against it for killing the bill and being partisan when over 90 democrats voted against it.

  48. Glad to see the truth is finally surfacing on this issue. I dont blame Clinton for this mess either, his general plan of making home ownership more accessible was a good idea that if properly executed would not have caused this mess. It did in fact help many millions of people own a home who were deserving. What happened and where the failure was in the greed of the raines and johnsons and those senators who were in their back pocket who ignored common sense and allowed them to manipulate the system for their own gain. The housing crisis was not caused by low down payment loans or even lowering the credit score standards, it was caused when they started ignorning common sense to line their pocketbooks by doing stated income loans, not verifying any income, allowing interest only loans etc that allowed people to purchase homes above their means. There is nothing wrong with purchasing a home at 100% even if you have had some credit issues as long as your income supports it. Foreclosures were caused by the adjustable rates, interest only and stated income loans that allowed people to get in over their head.
    What is most troubling is that Obama was in their pocket more than anyone else in his short time and if you dont believe that just look at him having Raines and Johnson as advisors. Also, the bailout or rescue planned proposed basically was also filled with fluff for groups like acorn etc with hidden spending when the govt received taxpayer money back. Personally I support them coming up with legislation that would not buy the bad loans(after all how can the govt keep track and service them) but instead they would get preferred stock in the company with guarantees of being the first paid back and having to be paid back before ceo bonuses. Also, was anyone else as disgusted by Pelosi and her actions? Can anyone be more out of touch than her? Or the parade of people on tv later blaming the 63 I think it was republicans who voted against it for killing the bill and being partisan when over 90 democrats voted against it.

  49. Wow, yeah, yippee, Donny, you’re finally listening to reason instead of emotion!

    Still voting for Nobama????

  50. Wow, yeah, yippee, Donny, you’re finally listening to reason instead of emotion!

    Still voting for Nobama????

  51. It’s moral hazard and adverse selection all over again. Insure (via implicit [now explicit] guarantee) that mortgage-backed assets will be covered by Freddie/Fannie (i.e. government-backed) buying them up at a price disproportionately low to the risk level, and we end up with people (via banks which had unsustainable low rates for real [i.e. unsubsidized] market conditions which drove up the value of homes) taking more risk than they should at that price level and failing to mitigate the loss. What do we get? “Toxic” assets.

    I remember an article in The Economist over 3 years ago that predicted all this. Why? Securities have their current value based on what investors predict their future cash flow will provide (e.g. dividends). For more info on this, look up net present value (NPV) or individual rate of return (IRR) for a primer on what that looks like. A similar measurement can be used for housing by looking at historical rent (i.e. cash flow) and the market value to purchase the rented properties (i.e. the value of the security). This was historically stable, but it showed a bubble where rents were not nearly high enough to justify the high value of homes. To correct this, rents go up (that initially happened with this bubble), housing prices come down, or both result (not necessarily at the same timing as one drives the other). That was the widely accepted natural conclusion for that breed of beast.

    The good news is that we aren’t nearly as bad off as Japan was with a similar problem starting in the 90’s. They had the mother of all housing bubbles where the market value of all the land in Japan was higher than the market value of all the land in the United States. Japanese land is not particularly valuable in itself with its mountainous backbone; even with the Rockies, California should be worth more than Japan (land only). Their rent/value ratio was similarly out of proportion to the historical trend. Japan saw 10 years of decreasing property values as a result.

    I know this is probably localized, but I’m happy to hear silence on the “affordable housing crisis.” One of the central justifications for having freddie/frannie soak up so much debt at unrealistically low rates was to solve this problem. In the process of “solving it”, it not only created another problem set, but backfired on the initial one it was trying to solve (until now…) In fairness to the folks who set this up, home ownership is linked with lowering crime and other social ills to the point where ownership is widely believed to have a causal relationship. They were well-intended but misguided in subsidizing it like this.

    Anyone who tries to move the market’s invisible hand will end up getting slapped by it. The farther we try to move it, the harder the slap.

  52. It’s moral hazard and adverse selection all over again. Insure (via implicit [now explicit] guarantee) that mortgage-backed assets will be covered by Freddie/Fannie (i.e. government-backed) buying them up at a price disproportionately low to the risk level, and we end up with people (via banks which had unsustainable low rates for real [i.e. unsubsidized] market conditions which drove up the value of homes) taking more risk than they should at that price level and failing to mitigate the loss. What do we get? “Toxic” assets.

    I remember an article in The Economist over 3 years ago that predicted all this. Why? Securities have their current value based on what investors predict their future cash flow will provide (e.g. dividends). For more info on this, look up net present value (NPV) or individual rate of return (IRR) for a primer on what that looks like. A similar measurement can be used for housing by looking at historical rent (i.e. cash flow) and the market value to purchase the rented properties (i.e. the value of the security). This was historically stable, but it showed a bubble where rents were not nearly high enough to justify the high value of homes. To correct this, rents go up (that initially happened with this bubble), housing prices come down, or both result (not necessarily at the same timing as one drives the other). That was the widely accepted natural conclusion for that breed of beast.

    The good news is that we aren’t nearly as bad off as Japan was with a similar problem starting in the 90’s. They had the mother of all housing bubbles where the market value of all the land in Japan was higher than the market value of all the land in the United States. Japanese land is not particularly valuable in itself with its mountainous backbone; even with the Rockies, California should be worth more than Japan (land only). Their rent/value ratio was similarly out of proportion to the historical trend. Japan saw 10 years of decreasing property values as a result.

    I know this is probably localized, but I’m happy to hear silence on the “affordable housing crisis.” One of the central justifications for having freddie/frannie soak up so much debt at unrealistically low rates was to solve this problem. In the process of “solving it”, it not only created another problem set, but backfired on the initial one it was trying to solve (until now…) In fairness to the folks who set this up, home ownership is linked with lowering crime and other social ills to the point where ownership is widely believed to have a causal relationship. They were well-intended but misguided in subsidizing it like this.

    Anyone who tries to move the market’s invisible hand will end up getting slapped by it. The farther we try to move it, the harder the slap.

  53. The senate passed the bill today but I for one would just like to say it was used as an excuse for special interests once again. Items that have nothing to do with the current situation were put in this bill to get votes. Items like money for rural schools, disaster aid for certain states, tax deductibility in certain states only. You know there is a fundamental problem with the system when our so called leaders are out there patting each other on the back saying government worked like it should for the people. So in their opinion hiding pork spending into bills that have nothing to do with what they are voting on in other words paying each other off for votes is how it should work. This is why the issue of taxes is mute. What we need is someone who will try to stop this and who will out these people. McCain and Palin have said they would and on top of that have said they would name names. McCain has also said he would veto as much as he could. It honestly makes me ill that these people, dems and republicans have the nerve to get on tv, tell us how we need this bailout and its going to be good for us, promise to be bi-partisan, take credit for working for the people and in reality they have used this as an excuse to spend money on their pet projects trying to win votes and contributions.

  54. The senate passed the bill today but I for one would just like to say it was used as an excuse for special interests once again. Items that have nothing to do with the current situation were put in this bill to get votes. Items like money for rural schools, disaster aid for certain states, tax deductibility in certain states only. You know there is a fundamental problem with the system when our so called leaders are out there patting each other on the back saying government worked like it should for the people. So in their opinion hiding pork spending into bills that have nothing to do with what they are voting on in other words paying each other off for votes is how it should work. This is why the issue of taxes is mute. What we need is someone who will try to stop this and who will out these people. McCain and Palin have said they would and on top of that have said they would name names. McCain has also said he would veto as much as he could. It honestly makes me ill that these people, dems and republicans have the nerve to get on tv, tell us how we need this bailout and its going to be good for us, promise to be bi-partisan, take credit for working for the people and in reality they have used this as an excuse to spend money on their pet projects trying to win votes and contributions.

  55. This is our Senate in action, folks, that’s what they get paid the big bucks to do….

    Sadly, they will return home to their states and get elected again, so who’s ultimately to blame for this???

    The President and Vice President do not have any contol over the Senate or House. That’s OUR job to put in the better people. Presidents can only veto so much junk….

    God help us be wise.

  56. This is our Senate in action, folks, that’s what they get paid the big bucks to do….

    Sadly, they will return home to their states and get elected again, so who’s ultimately to blame for this???

    The President and Vice President do not have any contol over the Senate or House. That’s OUR job to put in the better people. Presidents can only veto so much junk….

    God help us be wise.

  57. intresting article about Sarah I found..

    gives her history in Alaska and what she went up against..

    There is more to her than what you see on the alphabet networks..

    http://baseballcrank.com/archives2/2008/10/politics_the_in_1.php

  58. intresting article about Sarah I found..

    gives her history in Alaska and what she went up against..

    There is more to her than what you see on the alphabet networks..

    http://baseballcrank.com/archives2/2008/10/politics_the_in_1.php

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.