Forum Thread

Lake Lanier Topics

(Lake Lanier Specific)

149 messages

Updated 2/24/2023 6:27:46 AM

Off-Topic

Lakes Online Forum

83,645 messages

Updated 5/30/2024 11:45:00 PM

Boat Maintenance

Lakes Online Forum

5,195 messages

Updated 5/31/2024 4:36:53 AM

Lake Lanier Fishing

(Lake Lanier Specific)

3 messages

Updated 7/28/2021 3:19:01 PM

Jokes

Lakes Online Forum

4,169 messages

Updated 4/15/2024 11:05:05 PM

Sports

Lakes Online Forum

4,261 messages

Updated 5/28/2024 6:31:10 AM

Grilling & Recipes

Lakes Online Forum

2,976 messages

Updated 3/20/2024 11:53:43 PM

Tallapoosa River Topics

Lakes Online Forum

98 messages

Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM

Forum Usage Rules

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	McCain, Freddie and Fannie
Date:	9/22/2008 11:32:06 AM

McCain is against lobbyists but his campaign manager, Rick Davis, as a lobbyist was paid more than $30,000 a month for five years as president of an advocacy group set up by the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to defend them against stricter regulations, current and former officials say. This should make even Water Watcher want to puke.

Name:	AUCATZ -	Reply
Subject:	McCain, Freddie and Fannie
Date:	9/22/2008 11:37:56 AM

...And Obama got a ton of money from Freddie and Fannie officials...go figure. One an indirect hit (a McCain worker), one a direct hit (Obama himself).

Name:	water_watcher -	Reply
Subject:	McCain, Freddie and Fannie
Date:	9/22/2008 12:21:07 PM

Obama got $90,000 from Fannie and he put the ex CEO on his payroll as an advisor.

Another example of a liberal trying to twist the truth.

McCain sponsored a bill to regulate Fannie and Freddie and the liberal like Obama blocked it saying it would hurt lower income people from getting housing.

Yes it would have ... like it should have ... rather than no money down, then can not pay and they just walk away ... they lose nothing and leave the banks holding the bag.

Yes with Obama you will get more of that. God help us. His policies really cleaned up and fixed Chicago didn't it. He was a "community organizer" and a state senator before going to washington ... all his great ideas left the city with one of the highest crime rates and highest taxes in the nation and still nearly bankrupt.

Oh he will create change .... we just dont want his change.

Name:	want2beonlake -	Reply
Subject:	McCain, Freddie and Fannie
Date:	9/22/2008 12:22:14 PM

Sorry, not entirely true about officials at Freddie and Fannie giving money to Obama.

The source for this data is the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, which has compiled a list of which political leaders received the most money from employees of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Obama's campaign cites this source to back up its claim that John McCain has received more than $2-million from big oil.

On the Freddie and Fannie question it as McCain said: Obama is No. 2 on the list, with $126,349, right after Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, who had $165,400.

But the list requires a few notes of explanation.

Corporations cannot give to candidates so the center's list adds up contributions from Fannie and Freddie employees and their families. Obama has received a lot of money during his presidential campaign, though, and Fannie and Freddie don't make his list of top 20 companies. (The top three companies with employees donating to Obama are Goldman Sachs, University of California, and Citigroup, according to the center.)

The New York Times looked at contributions from Fannie and Freddie's boards of directors and lobbyists, who are technically not employees. That analysis found Fannie and Freddie-related contributors gave $116,000 to John McCain and his related committees, compared with $16,000 to Obama and his related committees.

Nevertheless, the center's information does reflect which candidates are getting the most money from Fannie and Freddie employees. There are other ways to parse the campaign finance numbers, but McCain is correct when he says Obama got the second-most money on a list compiled by a respected, nonpartisan campaign finance watchdog. He would have been more accurate if he would have noted that he was talking about Fannie and Freddie employees.

Are none of you concerned that McCain got 2 million for big oil?

Are none of you concerned that McCain got 7 times as much money from Freddie and Fannie lobbyist and board of directors than Obama?

McCain agreed in 2006 to sign on with the Republican-led regulatory overhaul after he read the report that took 27 months to complete. Where was he prior to that if he thought there was an issue?

Name:	water_watcher -	Reply
Subject:	McCain, Freddie and Fannie
Date:	9/22/2008 12:29:39 PM

Spin it any way you want ... the facts are McCain tried to reform Fannie and Freddie and the dems blocked it.

READ:

This is what McCain said:

"I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation" said John McCain. "If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole. I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation."

This is what the great democratic leadership said in response:

”These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ”The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed. ”I don’t see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,” Mr. Watt said.

------------------

Spin that any way you want.

Name:	AUCATZ -	Reply
Subject:	McCain, Freddie and Fannie
Date:	9/22/2008 12:29:42 PM

I don't know who 'None of You' are, so I assume you group everyone who has concerns about a candidate together in one big lump. Neither candidate is perfect by any means, and everyone must choose (or not vote at all) the one that they feel will be either (1) the best person to be President the next 4-8 years, or (2) the person least likely to further damage our country, our economy, etc.

Any set of numbers can be parsed to advantage or disadvantage. Both candidates have flipped on issues. Both have supported things that no one supports 100%. It's still a personal choice. We all have our concerns, and some of us may be voting for the lesser of two undesirables rather than taking what we feel like will be a big gamble on a newcomer.

Name:	want2beonlake -	Reply
Subject:	McCain, Freddie and Fannie
Date:	9/22/2008 12:38:08 PM

AUCATZ, no I don't lump everyone into that category.

Mine was aimed as the likes of Water Watcher and his ilk who cannot admit that there is anything wrong with either of the Republican Candidates.

When WW makes a point against Obama/Biden it is usually listed as a fact and when a counter is made showing something against McCain/Palin - it is called a spin....

I too have concerns over all the choices and will probably be like you and trying to decide the lesser of the two evils.

I also agree with other posters that if it appears that the dems will keep the majority in the house and senate than I will probably vote McCain but just to keep the checks and balances where they need to be.

I think it is scary that these are best four we can come up with.

Name:	AUCATZ -	Reply
Subject:	McCain, Freddie and Fannie
Date:	9/22/2008 12:39:20 PM

I agree. It's a real pickle to be in, isn't it?

Name:	want2beonlake -	Reply
Subject:	McCain, Freddie and Fannie
Date:	9/22/2008 12:43:11 PM

yes, it is - but it cannot be any worse that it has been for the last 8 years -so there is some hope out there.

and I am waiting for both our posts to get flamed...

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Lobbyists - populist silliness
Date:	9/22/2008 2:04:06 PM

The only reason any of these people (Dems or Rep) make noise about being "against lobbyists" is pandering to the electorate that for some reason has been convinced there is something inherently wrong with lobbying government. So McCain is against lobbyists and has one on staff and Obama is against lobbyists and takes jillions from them (as does McCain)......it is the usual Washington B.S. to say one thing and do another.

I personally have no problem with lobbying the government and frankly the larger and more powerful government becomes the more important it is to try to influence people that have so much control over our lives. What I want to know is who is giving what to whom and what are they asking for. If there were transparency in the system than we could decide whether we liked a candidate taking money from this group but not that group.

For example, I have no problem with a candidate being influenced and financially supported by the NRA because I am all for the 2nd amendment. If you were for gun control then you could look at the very same candidate and come the opposite conclusion. Sunshine is the answer and I can tell you that neither party wants that light shining on them. I can tell you that I have paid hundreds of thousands to lobbyists to get the right attention from government officials because we are trying to do something good for the environment, good for business and hopefully financially rewarding for our company. I may not like it but that is the way the world works and I would have no problem with sunshine on my efforts.

Name:	Feb -	Reply
Subject:	Do You Ever Worry -
Date:	9/22/2008 6:00:29 PM

that you might be arguing with several posters who only have one vote combined. LOL

Name:	want2beonlake -	Reply
Subject:	Do You Ever Worry -
Date:	9/22/2008 6:24:01 PM

Nope, on the contrary -that is what I am hoping.

The Republicans are masters at the spin.

What is so incredibly funny is that whenever they post something negative about Obama or Biden it is the truth but when someone post something negative about McCain or Palin - it is just "that liberal spin"

It is just too funny and so typical - you point out the discrepancies to them and they just ignore it and pull out some other lying email and spout it as the truth.

Name:	Feb -	Reply
Subject:	Do You Ever Worry -
Date:	9/22/2008 7:26:07 PM

Yes, It as though they speak from one keyboard. Now, maybe you will catch my drift. Between several of them there may only be one vote.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Lobbyists - populist silliness
Date:	9/23/2008 6:30:07 PM

You are right -- Lobbyists are not going anywhere. No one admits to liking lobbyists, yet there are a ton of them. In fact, my DH knew someone whose S.O. was a lobbyist for pasta. I dont' know if you caught the news reports, but at both conventions lobbyists hosted huge social events and served their prime ribs and lobsters in Asian soup spoons so they could stay within the new ethics guidelines.
I just smile when I hear either candidate talk about how they are going to change Washington. How many Presidental candidates, Congressional candidate, etc said this? And who has actually done it? I'm convinced that the only thing that will change Washington is term limits.

It seems a shame to me that the only people who want to run for President are career politicals. I'd like to see a really smart CEO like Jack Walsh or Bill Gates run. Heck, why not T.Boone Pickens?

Name:	Swimmer27 -	Reply
Subject:	What feb is not saying so..
Date:	9/23/2008 7:37:51 PM

.... loudly is, he is convinced that several of the aliases are me. I am so very flattered that he thinks so much of me, when he is such a small, insignificant piece of my life. It does give me a good chuckle when I see him continue to post on the subject. I have way better things to do with my life than try to manage and post under different aliases. Some have tried it, and even gotten away with it for a while, but eventually you screw up and 'out' yourself. In fact, I just 'outed' someone else on another forum myself a couple of weeks ago.

Have fun in yourt fantasy world feb. You have so many frineds here, why don't you ask some of them to do a little digging and find out if I am all these people you think I am. It's not so tough to do.

Now I am putting you on public notice. Stop with the inuendo. you can't hide behind your vaugness. All the regulars know who you are refering too. Its been ten freaking years dude, GET OVER IT!! Those resentments you are carrying are going to really mess with your serinity. Why work all your life to get here, and then bring all this hate and resentment with you? It is obviuosly bothering you. Let it go, or don't, I don't really care. But DO NOT make any more of your snide little passive aggressive remarks about me.

and PS-- I am flaming this myself because that supposedly brings it to the attention of the Webmaster or at least his surrogates and I want them to see it also.

Name:	Swimmer27 -	Reply
Subject:	Or how about.....
Date:	9/23/2008 7:46:12 PM

..... a Governor that has already instituted reforms in her own state. One that was no where near the national stage a month ago.

But see, we do agree on one very important issue. Term limits is the ONLY answer. Elected office is supposed to be about 'serving the public good'. It should NEVER be a carreer.

Name:	want2beonlake -	Reply
Subject:	Or how about.....
Date:	9/23/2008 10:27:15 PM

are you talking about one who went into office as first as a mayor with a 1.2 million deficit and left office with a 24.8 million dollar deficit? If so, then no thanks - not the fiscal responsibility I am looking for...

are you talking about the one who first supported the bridge to nowhere (while running for governor) and then later flipped and said she pulled the plug? (easy to pull the plug when the federal money has all dried up)

well, she fits her party - that is true enought if you believe even 1/3 of what is being written about her by people other than McCain's people...

Name:	AUCATZ -	Reply
Subject:	Or how about.....
Date:	9/24/2008 8:59:36 AM

I'll get flammed for typing this <sigh>, but I have to do it anyway. A Governor of a state has the duty to get ALL the money for his or her state that they can. Their job is to do the very best they can for their state. The fact that someone was 'for' something, then they changed their opinion over time is a fact that applies to every candidate on the ballot. It's human nature. You support something, time goes on and you gain a different perspective.

This isn't something that any of us should try to apply to just one candidate. The shoe fits them all.

Name:	want2beonlake -	Reply
Subject:	Or how about.....
Date:	9/24/2008 10:05:45 AM

*sigh* but she did it as Mayor (as far as the budget deficits)...

The Bridge to Nowhere - she supported it when she was a candidate and only said "thanks, no thanks once the project was dead anyay. Alaska kept the money for other projects.

Please explain the fiscal responsibility of these actions.

Name:	AUCATZ -	Reply
Subject:	Or how about.....
Date:	9/24/2008 12:30:25 PM

Still though...if your job is to take care of a city, or a state - aren't you out to get as much money for them as you can? You are at the lower end of the food chain - you aren't looking out for the Feds - you're looking out for your constituents. Heck, the Feds should have reclaimed the money...seems to me that with them it's like 'oops the money is gone...oh well'. Wonder if Sen. Stevens was instrumental in Alaska keeping the funds?

Name:	want2beonlake -	Reply
Subject:	Or how about.....
Date:	9/24/2008 2:09:10 PM

I agree in part with what you say - but is it fiscally responsible to enter your elected office with a 1.2 million dollar deficit and to then leave it with a 24 million dollar deficit?

I just don't understand why that simple question cannot be answered.

Name:	Swimmer27 -	Reply
Subject:	Or how about.....
Date:	9/24/2008 4:06:53 PM

you are the only source that I have seen quote that figure. In fact you are the only one I have seen that says anything like that. Just how do you think she is giving tax rebotes to the citiziens if there was a 24million deficit. Frankly, I just don't beleive it. Provide a link to some legitiamate source that says the same and I will read it. Bet you can't.

NO BLOGS count. A legitimate news source only.

Name:	want2beonlake -	Reply
Subject:	Or how about.....
Date:	9/24/2008 5:13:30 PM

I got it from PolitiFact.com. All of this stemmed from the email heard around the world that was sent by Anne Kilkenny (who is NOT a fan of Palin so I take her email with a grain of salt as there is evident history between the two - read the email to see).

PolitiFact did the research and indicated that Kilkenny was not correct that Wasilla had a zero deficit when Palin came into office but rather, it was at a little over a million.

here is the link: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/705/

but the gist of the research that PolitiFact did was based on the review of the budgets that Wasilla has now made available on their own webpage and Politifact states that: "The city of Wasilla has made available all of its budgets during Palin’s tenure. So we grabbed the fiscal year ending 1996 (when Palin took the reins), which showed the city’s long-term debt at $1.12-million, mostly for paving and sewer projects.

The annual financial report for fiscal year ending June 30, 2002 — Palin’s last year in office — shows that the total long-term debt was $24.8-million. So Kilkenny is off a bit when she says long-term debt went from zero to $22-million. But it did increase $23.7-million."

Now all of that being said - she probably had some help in getting them there - but as everyone likes to point out for the other candidates - it happened on her watch and it does not support her contention that she is a "fiscal conservative"

when you mentioned tax rebates - I think what you are talking about are the rebates she handed out while Governor. That came from the following:

We looked into the record and found that Palin did push for a measure to return state surplus revenue back to residents of mineral-rich Alaska. On Aug. 7, 2008, the Alaska Legislature approved a measure she promoted that would send $1,200 to every Alaskan who qualifies.

That comes to about $741-million for state residents, out of an estimated $2.7-billion in increased oil taxes and royalties.

again, this is from politifact.com.

I have found this to be a pretty good site which I have found to be the most objective I have seen online.

I personally feel a lot of people are caught up in her appearance, it would not be the first time a politician won favor because of their looks...

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Or how about.....
Date:	9/24/2008 5:58:16 PM

I agree that it is the responsibility of the elected officials to represent the interests of their constituites. As much as I hate earmarks, I can't blame the politicals for trying to get them for their state. Dollars are jobs and tangible proof to the voters that their interests are being looked after.
(I can't tell you how many times I've been party to briefing Hill staffers when DoD has to make a decision that would affect jobs).

I also think public representatives have a fiscal responsibility and they need to be held accountable for their decisions. If not, they betray the public trust.

We've all heard of the "fog of war" that accounts for bad tactical decisions on the battlefield -- maybe there is a "fog of public service" that accounts for bad fiscal decisions by politicals.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	What feb is not saying so..
Date:	9/24/2008 6:04:39 PM

I want to reassure you that Feb is not staying up nights worrying about your identity. He sleeps quite soundly every night. And I have not noticed any of the anger or bitterness that you mention -- I think it's safe to say that "he's over it DUDE".

Name:	Swimmer27 -	Reply
Subject:	What feb is not saying so..
Date:	9/25/2008 11:40:49 PM

Obviuosly you are incorrect. He has made several of his snide remarks lately, including the one above. I do find it interesting that you are taking up his slack though. As always he isn't man enough to own up to his own cr@p, but now sends his wife out to fight his battles. What a guy!!

So be sure and pass the message along. Leave me and any insuations about me out of his posts.

Quick Links
Lake Lanier News
Lake Lanier Photos
Lake Lanier Videos