DailyKos and DemocraticUndergroud types are starting to get a bit miffed at their messiah. So far, no one from their ranks has been given the nod to take a spot on Obama's staff or to fill his cabinet openings. The "progressives" are noticing, too, that far from bringing a "new" wave of politics to Washington, so far Obama is bringing back the age of Clinton. Instead of Washington becoming Obamopolis, it is a re-birthed Clintonville that is rising like a phoenix from the ashes.
It is certainly too early to claim that Barack Obama is going to be a centrist president like the far lefties fear. After all, he hasn't even taken office yet. But, one thing that can be said, when evaluating his pick of staffers and cabinet positions thus far, he sure ain't the candidate of "change" he claimed to be when he was a candidate. Obama has picked no one "new," no one "different," and no one "forward looking." So far, every choice he's made has either been an old Clintonite or another of those old politicos from the 90s that have been on the outside looking in since the year 2000.
The Progressive magazine, for one, is wondering just what the heck is going on?
When is Obama going to appoint someone who reflects the progressive base that brought him to the White House?
Not that I want him to do so, because I most certainly do not, but it is a good question. Was the candidate of hope-n-change just stringing the wild-eyed left along just so he could win?
The Progressive asks why Hillary Clinton is being considered for Secretary of State, as well. The question shows how far Hillary fell from the left's grace as she angled for the middle during the four years running up to the 2008 election. They really do despise her. Not even their love for Bill Clinton is holding up well, apparently.
The funniest suggestion the Progressive made was in saying that the famous UFO spotter from Ohio, Dennis Kucinich, would have made the better choice for Secretary of State. That suggestion in and of itself really proves how one just cannot take the folks at The Progressive magazine seriously.
Still, it is amusing to see Obama wholly snub the extreme left as he gears up to start his administration.
And it isn't just The Progressive magazine starting to get suspicious.
On DailyKos, the Kossacks are beginning to wonder if they've been hornswaggled? Of the latest Obama picks, a recent KosKid carped:
So that's 2 DC lifers, 1 billionaire & 1 more Clinton vet. 50% of hires are Clintonites. Lobbyists abound...What's changing?
Another good question.
A poster on the DemocraticUnderground was just as wary of Obama's choices.
Obama's cabinet is at this point filled with DLC people, very centrist, anti populist, and big business among other things. We heard "change and clean up Washington" before from the last President and we got a redux on Nixon's and Reagan's people. Now we are getting a redux of the 90's Clinton people, that doesn't spell change to me...
Even the Associated Press is starting to wonder...
President-elect Barack Obama promised the voters change but has started his Cabinet selection process by naming several Washington insiders to top posts.
The L.A. Times also chimes in with a piece headlined "Antiwar groups fear Barack Obama may create hawkish Cabinet." So, amusingly enough, the far left's eyebrows are being raised everywhere.
I won't pretend to say what Obama's picks "mean" at this point. But, for now let me revel in the fact that many on the far left are beginning to feel like they've been sold a bill of goods. That they've emptied their pocketbooks on snake oil. That they've been took!
To quote Captain Kirk: "I'm LAUGHING at the 'superior intellect.'"
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Well liberals, here's your "change"...
November 20, 2008 - 05:43 ET by doepackStarting to smell like disillusionment, no?
Brainwashed Liberals will accept anything Obama does
November 21, 2008 - 07:36 ET by PopularTechHe could hire criminals for staff positions and the useless idiots would cheer.
Censored Global Warming Videos
Let me be the first to say....
November 20, 2008 - 05:53 ET by HeavyChevySAWEEEEEET.
It will be interesting to see all of these left wingers head explode knowing that their change is not worth two cents.
I can't believe I'm going
November 20, 2008 - 06:05 ET by motherbeltI can't believe I'm going to say something good about Clinton but.......
at least when Clinton came in promising a new trend, he brought his own people, untested in the national arena as they were, because they were his compatriots.
Let's face it...Obama knows he has no experience in really getting things done in a government. He also know that he can't bring in his own past associates (Bill Ayers as Sec Ed???) so he knows he has to go with the old guard. You start as you intend to go on. He proved that with Joe Biden.
The more things "change," the more they remain the same.
Great minds ...
November 20, 2008 - 10:08 ET by KC MulvilleThinking the same thing, mb.
One of the drawbacks to having little experience in Washington is that you don't know who knows (really knows) what. In the beginning, therefore, you rely on surface impressions. You rely on people who have the largest (if not always the deepest) reputations, because you don't have anything else to go on.
The narrative that the media is trying to build is that Obama reigns supreme, and all the Democrats will have to get on the Obama bandwagon. I've said it before, and let me say it again: they have him right where they want him. Obama will have to depend on the Democrat establishment, and they will dictate to him.
When it comes to being president, we don't need a warm smile. We need a spine, and sometimes a backhand to swat people with. I don't know if Obama has either, and his performance until now suggests he doesn't.
When are the Progressives
November 20, 2008 - 06:43 ET by txradioguyWhen are the Progressives gonna learn that they are simply a means to an end for the Dems they so ardently worship?
"I May Be Changed By War, But I Will Not Be Defeated By It" - Audie Murphy
One could...
November 20, 2008 - 07:04 ET by Warner Todd HustonOne could ask the same question of conservatives. Though, conservatives do have more legitimate representation than the far left does, thank God.
Change?
November 20, 2008 - 07:30 ET by littlemissmuffinYes We Can....."Change" the Bush Cabinet back into the Clinton Cabinet. Change you can believe in.......ummmmmmm
Seems like Obama is trying to do everything Bill Clinton did. Where's the "change?"
"If we conservatives moved to those seven non-existent States, the government couldn’t find us and tax us to death!"
I bet Michelle keeps a
November 20, 2008 - 10:31 ET by Hunter12I bet Michelle keeps a closer eye on the interns than Hillary did.
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." - Sir Winston Churchill
That's why...
November 20, 2008 - 10:48 ET by AJBThat's why they're letting the Clintons move in. Bill has dibs on renting out the Lincoln Bedroom again and will skul the guy in the secret hideaways for the hanky panky. Hill girl will probably be hitting in Michelle anyway...
You got that right!
November 20, 2008 - 11:24 ET by MaximusBraveheartThey will be trying to rip his pants off. And Barney Frank... Michelle needs to put those locking underwear on him!
M-B
But we are still saddled
November 20, 2008 - 11:16 ET by txradioguyBut we are still saddled with the Susan Collins' and Olympia Snowes' of the GOP.
Not to mention Graham and McCain and a few others that haven't learned that playing nice with the Democrat Party only gets you a slap in the face.
Perhaps the GOP needs to take a page from the DNC playbook and start listening to the people that post at places like here and FR and a few others to get back in touch with the voters who pull the lever for them.
As long ast the pols on both sides of the aisle don't feel any kind of threat to their power...they'll keep telling us one thing to get our vote and do something completely different up here in D.C.
"I May Be Changed By War, But I Will Not Be Defeated By It" - Audie Murphy
They've been had before.......
November 20, 2008 - 07:32 ET by ConLosRepublicanosNoBill Clinton was a progressive super star back 1992 but then
did a 180 because he knew that if he wanted to last he needed to be more to the
center than more to the far-left. I certainly don't think Obama will be a
centrist but I don't think Kossacks will be please with him since he won't
bring any change to Washington.
Also most of does appointments can be describe as "Progressives" the
problem is that they are the same "Progressives" who
"betrayed" them during the Clinton
years.
Am I in the right place?
November 20, 2008 - 07:33 ET by Bob in TampaOne of the current Saturn commercials features a man who, after looking at several of the new Saturn vehicles, runs back outside to check the logo on the dealership sign. Apparently, he's not sure he is in the right place.
It looks like the libs are wonderning the same thing!
Just give them a few more months... they'll be all over the place saying something like "Oh, what have we done???"
PS: Glad to give a car company some free advertising. It sounds like they think they need all the help they can get.
Kucinich UFOs
November 20, 2008 - 07:34 ET by ConScottTo be fair, Obama did give a certified UFO nutcase the position of transition team chief. Possible "Extraterrestrial Czar" appointee, John Podesta, was a small bone-toss to the loons, but then again, another Clinton dude so who knows?
Kucinich is small fry compared to Podesta. One claims he saw something while visiting science queen, Shirley MacLaine, (and they both smoked menthols afterwards), but the other, Mr. Podesta, has a bead on the secret government documents that he claims "the public can handle."
Don't be surprised if you start hearing the Roswell chant, "Crash, Baby, Crash"........as back-engineered, alien technology is offered as our best hope for solving the energy crisis. After all, President Bush has obviously withheld them Area 51 documents to protect the airline industry.
The Reason
November 20, 2008 - 08:01 ET by Long Island PeteThe reason the messiah is picking all these Clinton hacks is because he doesnt know of anyone else. He was a back bench state senator, and has spent so little time in the US Senate, that he hasnt had the time to get to know anyone else. So why not go back to the "good old days" of the Clintons. And when his administration fails, he can always blame them.
wrong!
November 20, 2008 - 10:12 ET by AJBHe sold his soul to the Clintons to have her drop out, plain and simple.
Why blame them when you can
November 20, 2008 - 10:15 ET by AJWhy blame them when you can blame Bush? Afterall, he's become the vortex of baseless blaming over the last 8 years. Even when he's out of office, he's still to blame.
WHAT???
November 20, 2008 - 08:37 ET by AJBI'm SOOO confused! Please help me out here! No CHANGE? But we wanted CHANGE! When you asked me on the street, I eagerly shouted WE WANT CHANGE into the TV camera, until that stupid reporter asked the question 'what does that mean'. Just because the only answer I had was 'I don't know but I want CHANGE NOW!!', they made fun of me. But I voted for Obama anyway. But now, the only CHANGE I see is change to the Clintons again. NNNOOOO! You mean four more years of THAT?
Since it is not physically possible for THE ONE to speak anything but the truth, something must be TERRIBLY wrong! I just KNOW in my heart that everything on TV is TRUTH! I know that everyone DESERVES free health care. Everyone DESERVES a three day work week. Everyone DESERVES full retirement without any savings. Everyone DESERVES world peace. Everyone DESERVES free sex at any time with no consequences. Everyone DESERVES to choose to fix those stupid pregnancy problems with a vacuum because its inconvenient.
All we have to do is wish it and it will come true, just like on I Dream of Jeannie. I know it. I saw it LIVE in her living room.
So HELP ME HERE! Where's MY CHANGE? And while you're finding it for me, I also want a vacation on a cruise ship, a new car, a BIGA$$ old plasma, new stereo, new carpet for the trailer and more FREE BEER. Just because I dropped out of school I have low self esteem and ITS ALL YOUR FAULT. So NOW YOU HAVE TO TAKE CARE OF ME FOREVER.
Please send all by my birthday next week. Thank you.
Nothing is terribly
November 20, 2008 - 09:14 ET by motherbeltNothing is terribly wrong.
The definition of "change" has been recalibrated.
Hey! I didn't see that
November 20, 2008 - 10:39 ET by Hunter12Hey! I didn't see that "Free sex with no consequences" plank in the Democratic platform. I want to change my vote. We are definitely going to need something to keep our mind off the coming disaster.
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." - Sir Winston Churchill
Free sex
November 20, 2008 - 12:32 ET by AJBBarney will be GLAD to come over to your house. Buy powdered soap... takes longer to pick up :-)
He's out of luck. I'm
November 20, 2008 - 12:42 ET by Hunter12He's out of luck. I'm booked. My wife and my girlfriend are the same person and she doesn't leave me much energy to do more than admire ocassional scenery passing by. I'd heard BHO was wired that way, but past the early primary days, that didn't get much traction.
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." - Sir Winston Churchill
Madelyn Albright waits
November 20, 2008 - 08:41 ET by Red JeepMadelyn Albright is waiting for her call. Chelsea Clinton is too.
Dont Forget
November 20, 2008 - 09:02 ET by AJBHelen Thomas for Press Secretary
Janet Reno for Dance Party Captain
Jesse Jackson for fundraising and shakedowns
Al Sharpton for hair styling
John Edwards for official 'procurer' of female talent
Bill Clinton night manager for the Lincoln Bedroom
Joy Behar for warming the oval office -- hot air queen
And the list goes on and on...
I have had a
November 20, 2008 - 08:51 ET by MidAmericaI have had a lingering doubt as to whether obama really has the work ethic to be President. A man of his age who has never had a real job? So by appointing all these experienced clintonites who have already run the government he may be able to vote 'Present' doing this job too.
There you go again...
November 20, 2008 - 09:03 ET by AJBWork? We were all sold on this being the promised land... we can retire at 30, free health care, free houses and mortgages, free lunch, free breakfast, free plasma tvs. WORK? Why would we want to do that? We have illegals for that!!
We Warned Them!
November 20, 2008 - 09:05 ET by northoneLet's see. We pointed out that Obama was an empty suit. We pointed out that his resume was razor-thin. We pointed out he had no executive experience. We pointed out that his "leadership" qualifications were that he spent a few weeks in the senate and then started running for president. And now the disciples are surprised and miffed that their messiah is relying on the Clintonistas to form his cabinet? Why is this a surprise? It's simply a reflection of The Great One's lack of experience and lack of confidence in his own abilities. It's going to be a long four years. God Bless (and help!) America.
What are you talking about?
November 20, 2008 - 09:57 ET by Warner Todd HustonWhat are you talking about? There was hope, and change, and hopeychange and chngiehopenstuff... we had it all with Obama, man!
Jonah Goldberg hit the nail
November 20, 2008 - 10:14 ET by motherbeltJonah Goldberg hit the nail on the head when he said of Obama:
Not only does he talk about hope - a lot - he talks about the
importance of talking about hope. He talks about how he hopes to talk
more about talking about the importance of talking about hope.
Hopefully.
He has WICKED AWESOME Experience!!
November 20, 2008 - 10:13 ET by AJBHe had 143 days as US Senator before he got in the race. He wrote REAMS of legislation in those 143 days, passed millions of bills and saved the planet with ALGore.
It's simply a reflection of
November 20, 2008 - 10:23 ET by SeashellIt's simply a reflection of The Great One's lack of experience and lack of confidence in his own abilities.
Yeah, I think he realizes that he is way in over his head. How people could have elected a man to this position with NO experience is just CRAZY.
Oh, no...
November 20, 2008 - 10:27 ET by Warner Todd HustonOh, no, I disagree with you that he lacks "confidence." In fact he has confidence coming out his ears. It's just not DESERVED confidence. It's based solely on his self-delusions of godhood, not on any actual achievements.
WTH
November 20, 2008 - 19:58 ET by SeashellWell, perhaps....I kind of subscribe to the theory that Obama initially ran not thinking that he would win but to get his name out there on the national scene, or maybe to be Hill's VP choice. His candidacy snowballed and he won. Now he is the Pres. elect, and he's nervous, and as I said he's in over his head, hence all the Clinton era cabinet picks. I believe that he has got to be overwhelmed and scared to be the President elect knowing that he has no idea what he's doing.
On the other hand, maybe you're completely right. He may be filled with the "self-delusional confidence" that you speak of. Certainly the MSM has catapulted him into believing he is this Messianic figure that can do all things and do no wrong.
He has to go with
November 20, 2008 - 10:53 ET by Hunter12He has to go with Clintonistas. Most of the Carterites are dead.
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." - Sir Winston Churchill
Thank GOD!
November 20, 2008 - 09:19 ET by SRPwrdI bet the whole damn farm that this would happen. I can't wait until about 4 years, when I can tell my dumb liberal friends, who spouted CHANGE at every turn, even when I brought up Senate old-timer Biden, that they were attracted by a stupid, idiotic, even Communistic, one word campaign slogan. Please Obamessiah, keep giving us this CHANGE we NEED.
Change for Sure!
November 20, 2008 - 09:35 ET by northoneObama's "change" is equivilant to when I forget to do my laundry and am forced to go to the laundry basket and change into a pair of underwear I wore last week. Welcome back, Clintonista's! We barely missed you!
eww
November 20, 2008 - 09:39 ET by sherylsimseww
I call it the ripple
November 20, 2008 - 10:18 ET by AJI call it the ripple effect. He says hope, and it ripples through the democrats, causing erotic side-effects. Ughh.....
I know...
November 20, 2008 - 10:23 ET by AJBI know I'm feeling the Chris Matthews TINGLE down my leg too...... mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
I am betting/hoping that
November 20, 2008 - 09:38 ET by ForeverOnTheRightI am betting/hoping that Obama will try to be a centrist in order to set himself up for a second term. But in the second term all bets are off so to speak. I am kind of hoping he will have enough failures and disgruntled supporters in the next four years that he will not be re-elected.
But as I have been reading there is a law suit that has gone to the Supreme Court that is now in “conference” challenging Obama’s eligibility to be Prez., if it comes out of “conference” and is ruled on, and if it goes against Obama, we may have Biden as Prez. and someone else as Vice. Then we have horse of a different color.
I heard that if Obama was
November 20, 2008 - 10:08 ET by sherylsimsI heard that if Obama was determined to be ineligible that President Bush would stay on another year while there was another election... Just what I heard, but don't think there is any way to guess how it will be decided. I am not getting my hopes up for anything good to come of it. Wouldn't it be nice to have a "Do over" though?
Nice, but ...
November 20, 2008 - 10:28 ET by KC MulvilleBush cannot serve past January 20.
If Obama is ruled ineligible, Biden becomes president.
Yikes. Well that changes
November 20, 2008 - 13:46 ET by sherylsimsYikes. Well that changes how I feel about how this whole BC drama turns out. <Sound of last hope being dashed>
Biden as Prez? Talk about
November 20, 2008 - 10:20 ET by motherbeltBiden as Prez? Talk about frying pan into the fire!!
I'm no lawyer or constitutional scholar, but it seems to me that the law of succession would not apply in that case.
Ineligibility for the office is not the same as becoming unable to fulfill the duties.
Whack Jobs is a three letter word
November 20, 2008 - 09:56 ET by dboWhen is Obama going to appoint someone who reflects the progressive base that brought him to the White House?
I think the Zero looked at the results of a recent Zolgby poll and youtube video and decided that his "progressive base" are even bigger whack jobs than he is.
hmmm... Dow below 8000...
November 20, 2008 - 09:59 ET by MightyMouthDoes anyone have the stones to say "the Obama factor"?
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
No it's Dubbya's fault.
November 20, 2008 - 10:22 ET by AJNo it's Dubbya's fault. 110.999999999% his fault. How dare you blame the Messiah?
Wouldn't suprise me a bit...
November 20, 2008 - 11:44 ET by MightyMouth...especially when he does stuff like this...
which brings up another issue: I have a conservative friend who hates Bush "because he spends too much". I wanted to thump him in the head for supporting the "fiscal conservative": obama..duh!?
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Don't you just LOVE IT?
November 20, 2008 - 10:57 ET by AJBI just crack up every time I see the graphic you guys used for this piece. I will have to make that my avitar on my blog posts :-)
Thanks for noticing the
November 20, 2008 - 21:09 ET by Warner Todd HustonThanks for noticing the animated graphic. I made it myself.
I must have missed the word
November 20, 2008 - 11:25 ET by marpelI must have missed the word "Back" during Obama's campaign...I thought it was "Change You Can Believe In"....I just realized, it was "Change BACK You Can Believe In"! So, your graphic is absolutely spot-on. It's a new Clinton administration w/ a new CEO....But, Bubba's still the Chairman of the Board....
LOL!
Here's a poem I just got by
November 20, 2008 - 12:55 ET by marpelHere's a poem I just got by email:
No Hard Feelings...To The Democrats
The election day is over,
The talking is done.
My party lost, your party won.
So let us be friends,
Let arguments pass.
I'll hug my elephant,
You kiss your ass.
HaHaHaHaHa!
November 20, 2008 - 12:56 ET by NorthCoasterThe Left gets a poke in the eye too, doesn't that make me feel better?
NO! But there is some satisfaction in it.
Where else would you get
November 20, 2008 - 13:21 ET by goldbarWhere else would you get democrats with White House experience? Members of the Carter era are either dead or too old. Didn't W build his administration with his daddy's staff--Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc. I sense fear from the repugs with the pick of Rahm Emmanuel. In reality, the dems should fear him more than the repugs.
The point is "Where is the
November 20, 2008 - 13:35 ET by Hunter12The point is "Where is the promised change?". President Bush, 43 didn't campaign on "Change". Obama did. Emmanuel has been around DC for years and represents a hard-line politician that crams his opinion down people's throat and doesn't bother to reach across the aisle. No change and no unity here.
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." - Sir Winston Churchill
The change is in POLICY,
November 20, 2008 - 13:43 ET by goldbarThe change is in POLICY, not personnel. Emanuel is rougher on democrats than republicans.
How do you get new policy
November 20, 2008 - 13:49 ET by Hunter12How do you get new policy out of the same old personnel? It's fear of Obama's policies that is shredding the markets right now and the knowledge that the people he's putting in place will have no new answers that is feeding the downward spiral.
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." - Sir Winston Churchill
Which policies are you
November 20, 2008 - 13:56 ET by goldbarWhich policies are you talking about? Another attempt to say "Bush has been in charge for eight years, but nothing that is happening now is his fault". The markets are falling because of job numbers, the auto industry failure and other bellweather stocks that are being upended due to our current economic problems that have been culminating for the last several years. Obama had NOTHING to do with it.
Those stupid managers of
November 20, 2008 - 14:06 ET by Hunter12Those stupid managers of Freddie and Fannie that gave him a $135,000 and got nothing for their money. I don't say the current economic situation has nothing to do with the Republicans. They were more worrried about keeping their seats than doing what was right for America. You can't win an election when your Democratic opponent says, "He voted against houses for poor people." The Dems in congress that fought against regulation and the GOPers who went along are to blame. Barney Frank and Chris Dodd should be shot for their part.
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." - Sir Winston Churchill
Watch Out!!!
November 20, 2008 - 14:26 ET by needle"The markets are falling … due to our current economic problems that have been culminating for the last several years. Obama had NOTHING to do with it."
Obama may have had less to do with the sub-prime loan fiasco, that is at the root of our economic mess, than the rest of the Democrats, but in fact it was Clinton and his minions that turn the problematic Community Reinvestment Act into a thoroughly corrupt and deadly poison for our economy and the world’s; and now the arsonists are being given more power. All I can say is: Watch Out!!!
Impunitas semper ad deteriora invitat.
In early 2005, the Office
November 20, 2008 - 15:03 ET by goldbarIn early 2005, the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) implemented new rules that – among other changes – allowed thrifts with over $1 billion in assets to meet their CRA obligations without regard to services for, or investments in, their communities. In April 2005, a contingent of Democratic Congressmen issued a letter protesting these changes, saying they undercut the ability of the CRA to "meet the needs of low and moderate-income persons and communities".[35] The changes were also opposed by community groups concerned that it would weaken the CRA.[36]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6u_2MNwmos
Sorry, Goldbar. I thought
November 20, 2008 - 15:31 ET by Hunter12Sorry, Goldbar. I thought you were implying that the Democrats were not to blame for the economic meltdown. My bad. Loaning money to people who can't pay it back has been demonstarted to be bad business for government as well as banks.
[Edit] You've done a cut-and-paste out of Wiki, thinking it supports your position, whne it does just the opposite. The Thrift Oversight dept was trying to manuever away from provision that required banks to loan a certain percentage of their assets to low income entities. The Dems had pushed throught provisions that made it mandatory to give loans to people on food stamps, and TANF payments and such became part of the income that had to be considered when determining whether or not people could afford a loan. What the Dems said was that banks had to consider monies the government gave people that was earmarked to be spent on food, and in the case of food stamps, could be spent nowhere else, as part of their income.
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." - Sir Winston Churchill
Apparently, you haven't ever
November 20, 2008 - 15:32 ET by goldbarApparently, you haven't ever bought your own home. When you buy a home the first thing that happens is this: the bank qualifies you. This means THE BANK decides what level of risk they want to take on when loaning you money. The bank decides how much money the lender gets--not the other way around. If the bank qualifies you for a loan that you may be incapable of repaying, the fault is with the lender.
Look at the rules.
November 20, 2008 - 16:46 ET by Hunter12Look at the rules. The laws make it mandatory that a certain percentage of loans go to people who couldn't pay it back. The banks were forced by US law to make bad loans. Hence the meltdown. I've bougth two homes and qualified both times.
[Edit] As recently as July, from their own website the Dems are actually touting legislation they passed that will fuel the loan market collapse. From the Democratic Policy Committee:
[The bold for the percentage and extremely low-income families is mine. How do these people repay a loan?]
On July 26, 2008, the Democratic-led Congress adopted H.R. 3221, the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008, a comprehensive legislative package that would bring relief to American homeowners and stabilize the housing markets while maintaining fiscal responsibility. Specifically, the bill, which was signed into law (P.L. 110-289) on July 30, includes:
• The Federal Housing Finance Regulatory Reform Act of 2008 (GSE Reform), which would create a new, effective regulator for the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) so that these vital institutions can safely and soundly carry out their important mission of providing our nation's families with affordable housing; the legislation would also raise loan limits to expand affordable housing in high cost areas; in addition, this legislation would create the Housing Trust Fund, of which 75 percent of the monies must be used to benefit extremely low-income families, and a Capital Magnet Fund, which will leverage $10 for every dollar contributed by the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac;
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." - Sir Winston Churchill
CRA - Clinton's Baby. And
November 20, 2008 - 14:28 ET by katainkentCRA - Clinton's Baby. And proof that trickle up economics dont work.
member of the Conservative Independant Witness Protection Program since Nov. 5, 2008
Where'd he go? "An
November 20, 2008 - 15:10 ET by Hunter12Where'd he go?
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." - Sir Winston Churchill
Obama has no experience, no
November 20, 2008 - 13:39 ET by katainkentObama has no experience, no connections. So he has to rely on Clinton to dredge up old ties and fill the posts.
Hillary gets to backseat drive yet another administration!
member of the Conservative Independant Witness Protection Program since Nov. 5, 2008
What surprise?
November 20, 2008 - 13:43 ET by doug1950I don't see why anyone is surprised by any of this. Obama can not do anything without the DNC and they will pick his cabinet (they did it for Carter too). The more things change (ha) the more they stay the same. Anyone that believes anything that comes out of a career politicians mouth hasn't been paying attention. Over half the crap they promise they can not deliver, never could either by law or by lack of finances and or support. That is why it is so frustrating when people who vote slobber all over themselves with what a politician can DO for them. Goes back to looking at the person's character and core principles. None of them can do anything by themselves (probably a good thing) and most abandon their promises ten minutes after they win. There ought to be a couple of mandatory requirements for someone to run for public office; a minimum of a B+ in high school history and economics 101.
But, for now let me revel
November 20, 2008 - 14:13 ET by R D HelmBut, for now let me revel in the fact that many on the far left are beginning to feel like they've been sold a bill of goods.
I guess some of us are a little slower than others. :-)
-Dave
Did this country just elect Obama/Biden, or was it Soros/Ayers?
Obama isn't going to have
November 20, 2008 - 20:19 ET by bigtimerObama isn't going to have to do a thing, he is surrounded by everybody else that will do his bidding, all the while the msm heaping their endless praise on him.
He is and always has been basically an empty-suited sock-puppet doing The Chicago Machine/Soros backed slimy leftist creatures that will be the down fall of this country if they have their way...agenda, agenda, agenda.
...and heeeere's Johnny...speaking of another O appointment.
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh
What happened to the notion
November 20, 2008 - 21:17 ET by balboaWhat happened to the notion spouted by some that Obama was going to appoint Castro his secretary of state, etc.?
Obama can't go off to the far left with cabinet appointments. He campaigned on change, but I don't think that means EVERYTHING is going to be wildly radical.