From Daily Kos:
Here’s what she said to Sean Hannity today, in an interview with so many softballs it must have felt like a relaxing massage. This is from the Time magazine excerpt:
On her family’s reaction to be picked as the VP nominee:
“It was a time of asking the girls to vote on it, anyway. And they voted unanimously, yes. Didn’t bother asking my son because, you know, he’s going to be off doing his thing anyway, so he wouldn’t be so impacted by, at least, the campaign period here. So ask the girls what they thought and they’re like, absolutely. Let’s do this, mom.”As Andrew Sullivan helpfully points out, this is a direct contradiction to her now-famous interview with Charlie Gibson:
PALIN: I didn’t hesitate, no.
GIBSON: Didn’t that take some hubris?
PALIN: I — I answered him yes because I have the confidence in that readiness and knowing that you can’t blink, you have to be wired in a way of being so committed to the mission, the mission that we’re on, reform of this country and victory in the war, you can’t blink. So I didn’t blink then even when asked to run as his running mate.
WTF?
Digg this Blog
Share on Facebook
WatchMojo on Twitter
WatchMojo on YouTube
Add to Favorites
WatchMojo NewsletterJohn McCain’s “our economy’s fundamentals are strong” might be one of the dumbest things ever said in a campaign. Maybe even dumber than this:
“There is no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe, and there never will be under a Ford administration.” Frankel responded, “I’m sorry … did I understand you to say, sir, that the Soviets are not using Eastern Europe as their own sphere of influence in occupying most of the countries there?” Ford responded, “I don’t believe … that the Yugoslavians consider themselves dominated by the Soviet Union. I don’t believe that the Romanians consider themselves dominated by the Soviet Union. I don’t believe that the Poles consider themselves dominated by the Soviet Union. Each of these countries is independent, autonomous, it has its own territorial integrity, and the United States does not concede that those countries are under the domination of the Soviet Union.”
In response Carter said he’d like to see Ford “convince the Polish-Americans and the Czech-Americans and the Hungarian-Americans in this country that those countries don’t live under the domination and supervision of the Soviet Union behind the Iron Curtain.”
News reports about the debate were dominated by Ford’s statement and its potential effect on the race. Most observers felt the debate proved to be a turning point and the key to Carter’s narrow electoral victory. A post-debate Gallup poll on October 15 showed Carter six percentage points ahead of Ford, 48 percent to 42 percent.
Washington Post’s latest article takes Governor Palin to task for inflating Alaska - and her own - contribution to the US’ energy landscape.
The woman touted by John McCain as the most knowledgeable person in America on energy issues has been having a lot of trouble getting her basic energy statistics straight. Last week, Sarah Palin told Charles Gibson of ABC News that her state, Alaska, produced “nearly 20 percent of the U.S. domestic supply of energy.” On Monday, she told a campaign rally in Golden, Colo., that she had been responsible for overseeing “nearly 20 percent of the U.S. domestic supply of oil and gas.” Both claims are way off.
THE FACTS
While Alaska is a leading producer of crude oil, it produces relatively little natural gas, hardly any coal and no nuclear power. Its share of oil production has been declining sharply, and the state now ranks lower than Texas and Louisiana. Alaska is the ninth-largest energy supplier in the United States, accounting for a modest 3.5 percent share of the nation’s total energy production.
After nonpartisan Factcheck.org pointed out Palin’s error in her interview with Gibson, the governor revised her statement somewhat, limiting it to oil and gas. But data compiled by the Energy Information Administration (EIA) contradict her claim that she oversees “nearly 20 percent” of oil and gas production in the country. According to authoritative EIA data, Alaska accounted for 7.4 percent of total U.S. oil and gas production in 2005.
It is not even correct for Palin to claim that her state is responsible for “nearly 20 percent” of U.S. oil production. Oil production has fallen sharply in Alaska during her governorship. The state’s share of total U.S. oil production fell from 18 percent in 2005 to 13 percent this year, according to the EIA.
The McCain-Palin campaign did not respond to a request for an explanation.
THE PINOCCHIO TEST
The Republican vice presidential nominee continues to peddle bogus statistics three days after the original error was pointed out by independent fact-checkers.
Source. Yes people, the lies continue… Why, from Republicans themselves:
While the media is slowly starting to call the McCain campaign on their dishonest tactics, McCain’s staff boasts that they don’t care. As a McCain spokesman told the Politico, “We’re running a campaign to win. And we’re not too concerned about what the media filter tries to say about it.”
Enough said!
It’s a shame the morally bankrupt Republican party has John McCain to offer the American people, here is a real American who foresaw the mess we’re in now, from the House’s official website:
Congressman Ron Paul
U.S. House of Representatives
July 16, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Free Housing Market Enhancement Act. This legislation restores a free market in housing by repealing special privileges for housing-related government sponsored enterprises (GSEs). These entities are the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie), the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie), and the National Home Loan Bank Board (HLBB). According to the Congressional Budget Office, the housing-related GSEs received $13.6 billion worth of indirect federal subsidies in fiscal year 2000 alone.
One of the major government privileges granted these GSEs is a line of credit to the United States Treasury. According to some estimates, the line of credit may be worth over $2 billion. This explicit promise by the Treasury to bail out these GSEs in times of economic difficulty helps them attract investors who are willing to settle for lower yields than they would demand in the absence of the subsidy. Thus, the line of credit distorts the allocation of capital. More importantly, the line of credit is a promise on behalf of the government to engage in a massive unconstitutional and immoral income transfer from working Americans to holders of GSE debt.
The Free Housing Market Enhancement Act also repeals the explicit grant of legal authority given to the Federal Reserve to purchase the debt of housing-related GSEs. GSEs are the only institutions besides the United States Treasury granted explicit statutory authority to monetize their debt through the Federal Reserve. This provision gives the GSEs a source of liquidity unavailable to their competitors.
Ironically, by transferring the risk of a widespread mortgage default, the government increases the likelihood of a painful crash in the housing market. This is because the special privileges of Fannie, Freddie, and HLBB have distorted the housing market by allowing them to attract capital they could not attract under pure market conditions. As a result, capital is diverted from its most productive use into housing. This reduces the efficacy of the entire market and thus reduces the standard of living of all Americans.
However, despite the long-term damage to the economy inflicted by the government�s interference in the housing market, the government�s policies of diverting capital to other uses creates a short-term boom in housing. Like all artificially-created bubbles, the boom in housing prices cannot last forever. When housing prices fall, homeowners will experience difficulty as their equity is wiped out. Furthermore, the holders of the mortgage debt will also have a loss. These losses will be greater than they would have otherwise been had government policy not actively encouraged over-investment in housing.
Perhaps the Federal Reserve can stave off the day of reckoning by purchasing GSE debt and pumping liquidity into the housing market, but this cannot hold off the inevitable drop in the housing market forever. In fact, postponing the necessary but painful market corrections will only deepen the inevitable fall. The more people invested in the market, the greater the effects across the economy when the bubble bursts.
No less an authority than Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has expressed concern that government subsidies provided to the GSEs make investors underestimate the risk of investing in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Mr. Speaker, it is time for Congress to act to remove taxpayer support from the housing GSEs before the bubble bursts and taxpayers are once again forced to bail out investors misled by foolish government interference in the market. I therefore hope my colleagues will stand up for American taxpayers and investors by cosponsoring the Free Housing Market Enhancement Act.
We will GLADLY post John McCain’s plan if anyone comes across it. Here is Obama’s plan, from his website:
Bring about real change to our economy
Obama and Biden will cut income taxes by $1,000 for working families, because the economy needs to be revitalized from the bottom up, not top down. Read more »
Obama and Biden will enact a windfall profits tax on excessive oil company profits to give American families an immediate $1,000 emergency energy rebate to help families pay rising bills. Read more »
Obama and Biden believe that trade with foreign nations should create American jobs, not send them overseas. They will stand firm against agreements that undermine our economic security. Read more »
Obama and Biden believe that we should invest in innovation and manufacturing jobs in the growing clean energy market, freeing us from our dependence on foreign oil within a decade and creating 5 million green jobs. Read more »
Obama and Biden believe that rebuilding our highways, bridges, roads, ports, air, and train systems will create jobs, ensure safety, and bolster our bolster our long-term competitiveness. Read more »
Obama and Biden will increase federal support for research, technology and innovation for companies and universities so that American workers can lead the world in cutting edge jobs and products. Read more »
Obama and Biden will level the playing field for small business by eliminating all capital gains taxes on start-up and small businesses. Read more »
Obama and Biden will strengthen the ability of workers to organize for good wages, healthcare, and secure pensions. Obama and Biden will fight for passage of the Employee Free Choice Act. Obama and Biden will ensure that labor appointees support workers’ rights and will work to ban the permanent replacement of striking workers. Obama and Biden will also increase the minimum wage and make sure it remains a real wage year over year. Read more »
Obama and Biden will crack down on fraudulent brokers and lenders. They will make sure homebuyers have honest and complete information about their mortgage options, and they will give a tax credit to all middle-class homeowners. Read more »
Obama and Biden will establish a five-star rating system so that every consumer knows the risk involved in credit card borrowing. They will establish a Credit Card Bill of Rights to stop credit card companies from exploiting consumers with unfair practices. Read more »
Obama and Biden will reform our bankruptcy laws to protect working people, to ban executive bonuses for bankrupt companies, and to require disclosure of all pension investments. Read more »
Obama and Biden will help working families by doubling funding for after-school programs, expanding the Family Medical Leave Act. They will provide low-income families with a refundable tax credit to help with their child-care expenses, and encourage flexible work schedules. Read more »
Joseph E. Stiglitz, professor at Columbia University, was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2001 for his work on the economics of information and was on the climate change panel that shared the Nobel Peace Prize in 2008. Stiglitz, a supporter of Barack Obama, was a member and later chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers during the Clinton administration before joining the World Bank as chief economist and senior vice president. He is the co-author with Linda Bilmes of the “Three Trillion Dollar War: The True Costs of the Iraq Conflict.”
This is not the first crisis in our financial system, not the first time that those who believe in free and unregulated markets have come running to the government for bail-outs. There is a pattern here, one that suggests deep systemic problems — and a variety of solutions:
1. We need first to correct incentives for executives, reducing the scope for conflicts of interest and improving shareholder information about dilution in share value as a result of stock options. We should mitigate the incentives for excessive risk-taking and the short-term focus that has so long prevailed, for instance, by requiring bonuses to be paid on the basis of, say, five-year returns, rather than annual returns.
2. Secondly, we need to create a financial product safety commission, to make sure that products bought and sold by banks, pension funds, etc. are safe for “human consumption.” Consenting adults should be given great freedom to do whatever they want, but that does not mean they should gamble with other people’s money. Some may worry that this may stifle innovation. But that may be a good thing considering the kind of innovation we had — attempting to subvert accounting and regulations. What we need is more innovation addressing the needs of ordinary Americans, so they can stay in their homes when economic conditions change.
3. We need to create a financial systems stability commission to take an overview of the entire financial system, recognizing the interrelations among the various parts, and to prevent the excessive systemic leveraging that we have just experienced.
4. We need to impose other regulations to improve the safety and soundness of our financial system, such as “speed bumps” to limit borrowing. Historically, rapid expansion of lending has been responsible for a large fraction of crises and this crisis is no exception.
5. We need better consumer protection laws, including laws that prevent predatory lending.
6. We need better competition laws. The financial institutions have been able to prey on consumers through credit cards partly because of the absence of competition. But even more importantly, we should not be in situations where a firm is “too big to fail.” If it is that big, it should be broken up.
These reforms will not guarantee that we will not have another crisis. The ingenuity of those in the financial markets is impressive. Eventually, they will figure out how to circumvent whatever regulations are imposed. But these reforms will make another crisis of this kind less likely, and, should it occur, make it less severe than it otherwise would be.
“I’m always for less regulation,” McCain told the Wall Street Journal in March. He added: “I’d like to see a lot of the unnecessary government regulations eliminated.”
Did he forget those words? Apparently, so. Read this take, and many more here. It’s all there in the WaPo today.
