Amid the the fallout from the mortgage & credit crisis, John McCain first accused Obama of trying to score political points from tragedy… and then attempted to score political points from tragedy, by tying Obama to disgraced mortgage executives.
The problem? It’s a complete lie -
Statement from Frank Raines on the ad: “I am not an adviser to Barack Obama, nor have I provided his campaign with advice on housing or economic matters. “This is another flat-out lie from a dishonorable campaign that is increasingly incapable of telling the truth. Frank Raines has never advised Senator Obama about anything — ever. And by the way, someone whose campaign manager and top adviser worked and lobbied for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac shouldn’t be throwing stones from his seven glass houses.
- and Obama’s same-day response ad underscores the message of the week. The ball is back in Obama’s court: to stay.
Ahem. Non “instapundit” mainpage posts will return tomorrow.
Fact: Raines has gone on record as saying Obama’s people have contacted him about housing policy.
Fact: Another CEO, Johnson, was in charge of the VP search.
Fact: Obama is second on the list of total money recipients from F & F lobbying.
Fact: Obama opposed an attempt in 2005 by John mcCain to bring F & F under additional oversight.
I can only hope Obama keeps trying to wash his hands of this. It won’t work.
Posted by Progressive Conservative | September 21, 2008, 2:13 pmHey, Progressive….quit making stuff up and calling it facts. Try referencing original material It works better.
Meanwhile, Obama has put out his own series of false ads. Which sickens me since it isn’t necessary. McSame has enough real weaknesses. No need to lie.
Posted by Oldfart | September 22, 2008, 7:11 amDo your homework. All of the above is easily verifiable.
But speaking of ‘original material’…..’McSame’ ? Really? That’s all you’ve got?
Posted by Progressive Conservative | September 22, 2008, 7:52 amI just think that McCain trying to blame Obama for any of this can easily backfire to McCain.
Since he’s been in congress much longer than Obama has and hasn’t done that much to help, and in some cases has passed things that contributed to the problems we’re having. I think it’s just silly. You can’t blame Obama for the economic downturn, but you can point to some Republican policies.
I also think Obama has been handling himself better than McCain, and from what I’ve seen, has been talking about what we should do instead of trying to make this all about smearing his opponent. It makes me worried that McCain doesn’t have any ideas he can rely on to help the problem, and is instead just attacking Obama for it.
This shows some of what I’m talking about, but , : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmfeesYmx1Y
I’m taking it for a grain of salt since I’m not sure how much editing has gone into the McCain response (Couldn’t find it on youtube, just Obama’s).
p.s. I hate all the “clever” name changes people use. McSame, NObama, etc…They’re silly.
Posted by Oneiroi | September 22, 2008, 11:29 amThe Clinton administration pushed for more high-risk lending. The Bush administration tried to bring F & F under control in 2003. Democrats blocked it. McCain tried again in 2005. Democrats (Obama included) blocked it.
I think it’s worth noting in the middle of a Presidential campaign. Of course a bipartisan hand-holding moment benefits Obama because it ignores his ties to the people that caused a lot of this mess.
Posted by Progressive Conservative | September 22, 2008, 12:19 pmI just think it’s a bit amusing for McCain to have had a career of people and policy you can point to that helped cause this mess and then try to point to one or two things for Obama (which of mostly is because less of a record). I just can’t imagine that not backfiring.
I personally think the bipartisan approach is a good way to address the issue, and the “bipartisan” McCain has already made these real issues go to a blame game.
Because seriously…trying to blame a single person for the economic crisis is silly and belies the complexity and seriousness of the issue.
Posted by Oneiroi | September 22, 2008, 12:58 pmMcCain’s not necessarily trying to blame, but he IS effectively making the point that he had some good judgement on this crisis 2 years ago and Obama did not.
Nothing either one of them does is going to fix this. Most of the solutions put in place will be completed before November. So McCain needs to continue campaigning. And on this issue, his record is better.
Posted by Progressive Conservative | September 22, 2008, 1:26 pmOnce again, Progressive – no references. It’s all the same made up crap. CLINTON DID IT! Waah!
I’m not gonna do your work. No references = made up shit.
Posted by Oldfart | September 22, 2008, 3:13 pmFrom Media Matters:
During the September 21 edition of CNN’s Lou Dobbs This Week, Washington Times columnist and CNN contributor Diana West claimed that “two of [Sen. Barack Obama's] most trusted campaign advisers are deeply implicated in the mess at Fannie and Freddie. And I’m speaking of Franklin Raines and Jim Johnson. … It is just a political fact that Senator Obama must explain.” However, both Raines, a former Fannie Mae chairman and CEO, and the Obama campaign have denied that Raines is an adviser. Additionally, West did not note that McCain’s own “most trusted campaign advisers” have served as lobbyists for Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, or both, as Media Matters for America has documented. Furthermore, McCain campaign manager Rick Davis previously served as president of the Homeownership Alliance, a Washington-based advocacy group whose founding members included Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and which “defended the two companies against increased regulation,” according to Politico.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200809220011
See how that’s done, Progressive?
Posted by Oldfart | September 22, 2008, 3:58 pm*yawn*
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/17/mccains-attempt-to-fix-fannie-mae-freddie-mac-in-2005/
“Lehman Brothers’ collapse is traced back to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two big mortgage banks that got a federal bailout a few weeks ago. Freddie and Fannie used huge lobbying budgets and political contributions to keep regulators off their backs. A group called the center for responsive politics keeps track of which politicians get Fannie and Freddie political contributions. The top three U.S. Senators getting big Fannie and Freddie political bucks were democrats and number two is Senator Barack Obama.
Now, remember, he has only been in the Senate four years but still managed to grab the number two spot ahead of John Kerry, decades in the senate, and Chris Dodd who is chairman of the senate banking committee. Fannie and Freddie have been creations of the congressional democrats and the Clinton white house, designed to make mortgages available to more people, and as it turned out, some people who couldn’t afford them. Fannie and Freddie have also been places for big Washington democrats to go to work in the semi-private sector and pocket millions. The Clinton administration’s white house budget director Franklin Raines ran Fannie and collected 50 million dollars. Jamie Gurilli, Clinton Justice Apartment Official, worked for Fannie and took home 26 million dollars. Big Democrat Jim Johnson, recently on Obama’s VP search committee has hauled in millions from his Fannie Mae C.E.O. job.”
Posted by Progressive Conservative | September 22, 2008, 4:05 pmI mean, we can go into all this if McCain wants. We can start trying to compare who each person knows, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/22/us/politics/22mccain.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&ref=politics&pagewanted=print
(Which I also think it’s a bad move because it’s been something plaguing McCain since the beginning of his campaign).
We can talk about what bills each person pushed http://obama.senate.gov/press/070425-obama_durbin_in/
And we can spend all the time on it if McCain wants. But I don’t think that gets McCain ahead, I think it would be awash for him. I think in the end the media narrative of this crisis is that it’s at least partly to do with deregulation that Republicans and McCain have supported. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/20/business/20prexy.html?fta=y
Because what I’m looking for right now is who brings leadership during a crisis and who will actually bring up ideas that could help solve the problem., I think people don’t want their politician looking around for someone to blame and getting into a partisan fray in the middle of a “crisis”. They want them to be looking for the problem and addressing it, being a leader, and laying out a plan. Playing politics while the other guy is up talking about what to do just looks good for Obama and bad for McCain.
Later if you want to start looking back and blaming people that’s fine. But right now, I think McCain doesn’t have the advantage of the issue, and he needs to step up and lay out what he plans on doing. He didn’t do well in the beginning, but I do think he’s doing better at that part now. I do also think it’s funny you made fun of Obama talking about bi-partisanship since that’s what McCain is trying to talk about now.
Posted by Oneiroi | September 22, 2008, 5:23 pm*yawn*……
McSame also received several million dollars from both companies – as did most of Congress. But, McSame has been in Congress for 26 years….and has been in favor of deregulation for 26 years……and has voted consistently for no oversight for 26 years……until the other day when he suddenly decided that regulation and oversight were good ideas…..so he was against regulation before he was for it before he was……..
Quoting Progressive: “Freddie and Fannie used huge lobbying budgets and political contributions to keep regulators off their backs.” And guess who benefitted from those HUGE LOBBYING BUDGETS! McSame’s advisors, that’s who! To the tune of $30,000/mo for one of them who claims he “just ran the operation”…. A Karl Rove answer if I’ve ever heard one.
Yup – good ‘ol maverick straight talking McSame.
Hey – and a place named “hotair” is just the place to get good information from, eh? Isn’t that Michelle Malkin’s propaganda site? Yup Yup. Now there’s a reliable source….lol!
Posted by Oldfart | September 23, 2008, 6:58 amOF: McSame also received several million dollars from both companies – as did most of Congress.
Please cite your numbers because according to the link in the article McCain got just over $20,000 from them compared to well over $100,000 for Obama.
Posted by Progressive Conservative | September 23, 2008, 8:53 amIncensed by the advertisements, several current and former executives of the companies came forward to discuss the role that Rick Davis, Mr. McCain’s campaign manager and longtime adviser, played in helping Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac beat back regulatory challenges when he served as president of their advocacy group, the Homeownership Alliance, formed in the summer of 2000. Some who came forward were Democrats, but Republicans, speaking on the condition of anonymity, confirmed their descriptions.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26831560
Looks I was wrong about McCain’s and Obama’s numbers. I was including the millions that McCain’s lobbyist campaign managers and advisers earned. But McCain, himself, does not seem to have gained much:
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-trailmoney9-2008sep09,0,1969729.story
$112,000 for Obama out of $340 million in donations….not much of an influence there.
$16,400 for McCain…not much of an influence there.
But, once again, McCain DOES have Freddie and Fannie lobbyists working for him – and Obama does not.
BTW, WHY would a lobbyist making $30,000/mo give up that job to work for McCain? Unless, of course, he can be expecting to make much much more if McCain wins. (Yes, I know he lost the job when FM and FM went down BUT that doesn’t mean he didn’t have other jobs just as financially rewarding set up when that happened.)
Posted by Oldfart | September 23, 2008, 9:49 am