News-Record.com

... yea, maybe. Ayer's transgressions were focused on the American Government not the American people. We often lose sight of that disctinction.

If you have a problem with other people's friends, Bill, that is your problem, not anyone else's. I have a very diverse group of friends but my thoughts and actions are my own.

I always told my children I would not pick their friends for them. I also told them if they got into trouble, it would not be their friends who received the punishment. Worked out well and they learned two lessons; don't judge others on the basis of who others know and they (my kids) were responsible for their own actions/behaviors.

Apparently you, Bill, missed those lessons.

As my dear old dad always said..."When you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas".

Among the exotic people and organizations Obama has chosen to associate himself with over the years, among the most interesting is ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now):

"Inside Obama’s Acorn: By their fruits ye shall know them," National Review Online, By Stanley Kurtz:

"What if Barack Obama’s most important radical connection has been hiding in plain sight all along? Obama has had an intimate and long-term association with the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (Acorn), the largest radical group in America. If I told you Obama had close ties with MoveOn.org or Code Pink, you’d know what I was talking about. Acorn is at least as radical as these better-known groups, arguably more so. Yet because Acorn works locally, in carefully selected urban areas, its national profile is lower. Acorn likes it that way. And so, I’d wager, does Barack Obama."
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDZiMjkwMDczZWI5ODdjOWYxZTIzZGIyNzEyMjE0ODI=

Obama's involvement gives credence to his ablitiy to make change, and very serious change is needed from where we have come over the last eight years. Maybe McCain should have worked with them for a period so when he says reform people would believe him.

Most of us do not consider ACORN a radical group. So the fear mongering is starting back. It was to be expected, but most will not be fooled.

Gah, what am I gonna do? If, God forbid, I should ever run for office, I'll surely be haunted by my associations on this blog.

Thomas Paine, the agitator and founder of our dear country, would be jumping up and down in joy with Obama's involvement with ACORN. Paine espoused freedom for all citizens, and supported the need for continuous fight for citizens' rights, with the right to vote paramount to freedom, independence and prosperity. He was a radical, and created the change necessary to break the chains of tyranny from the conservative "stay the course" loyalist. Obama should be given the Thomas Paine Award!

Molly, you rock...I have been getting nasty emails from Republicans bashing Obama and accusing him of supporting ACORN. Since these folks are what I consider nuts, I just deleted the mail.

Thanks to you, I went to Google. EGAD, they are a grassroots group dedicated to helping poor people. I saw nothing on their website that I disagreed with.

Can those who are so afraid of ACORN please tell me what you fear.

Obama's campaign statement on the matter:

"Senator Obama strongly condemns the violent actions of the Weathermen group, as he does all acts of violence. But he was an eight-year-old child when Ayers and the Weathermen were active, and any attempt to connect Obama with events of almost forty years ago is ridiculous."

The Washington Post's "Fact Checker" calls the connection between the two, "is a tenuous one."
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/02/obamas_weatherman_connection.html

But don't let the fact that this "issue" has been thoroughly researched already stop you from penning vapid letters to the editor (that are answered by two google clicks) or, heaven forbid, discussing important things like policy.

Fight the good fight!

I appreciate Obama effectively ending any possibility for slavery reparations with his campaign statement. Thanks Denzien.

From the American Thinker, in part:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/09/barack_obama_and_the_strategy.html

Mortgage Crisis

And now we have the mortgage crisis, which has sent a shock wave through Wall Street and panicked world financial markets like no other since the stock market crash of 1929. But this is a problem created in Washington long ago. It originated with the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), signed into law in 1977 by President Jimmy Carter. The CRA was Carter's answer to a grassroots activist movement started in Chicago, and forced banks to make loans to low income, high risk customers. PhD economist and former Texas Senator Phil Gramm has called it: "a vast extortion scheme against the nation's banks."

ACORN aggressively sought to expand loans to low income groups using the CRA as a whip. Economist Stan Leibowitz wrote in the New York Post:

In the 1980s, groups such as the activists at ACORN began pushing charges of "redlining"-claims that banks discriminated against minorities in mortgage lending. In 1989, sympathetic members of Congress got the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act amended to force banks to collect racial data on mortgage applicants; this allowed various studies to be ginned up that seemed to validate the original accusation.

In fact, minority mortgage applications were rejected more frequently than other applications-but the overwhelming reason wasn't racial discrimination, but simply that minorities tend to have weaker finances.

ACORN showed its colors again in 1991, by taking over the House Banking Committee room for two days to protest efforts to scale back the CRA. Obama represented ACORN in the Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 1994 suit against redlining. Most significant of all, ACORN was the driving force behind a 1995 regulatory revision pushed through by the Clinton Administration that greatly expanded the CRA and laid the groundwork for the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac borne financial crisis we now confront. Barack Obama was the attorney representing ACORN in this effort. With this new authority, ACORN used its subsidiary, ACORN Housing, to promote subprime loans more aggressively

Ok, do you have anything new! I thought congress legislated laws, and banks did the lending? The year is 2008, we will be ending eight years of a Republican administration and period of predominantly Republican control of both houses. Do you mean to say that these people were meek, inept and not capable of taking action?

Now, Molly, would you expect anything less from the "party of personal responsibility"?

"The year is 2008, we will be ending eight years of a Republican administration and period of predominantly Republican control of both houses. Do you mean to say that these people were meek, inept and not capable of taking action?"

That's pretty much the way it was.

2003 - September 10 - Treasury Secretary John Snow, in testimony before the House Financial Services Committee: "We need a strong world-class regulatory agency to oversee the prudential operations of the GSEs [Fannie and Freddie] and the safety and the soundness of their financial activities . . ."

Barney Frank, D-MA, ranking member (now chairman), House Financial Services Committee: “These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis. The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”

Why Snow’s oversight proposal comes to naught: “Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.” ( “New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae,” New York Times, Sept. 11, 2003)

Congressional Democrats (even when in the minority) AND the National Association of Home Builders --- plus who knows how many other leftist activists groups --- are a formidable force against stepped-up regulation the big drivers of this financial catastophe, Fannie and and Freddie.

In fact, after accounting fraud was revealed at Fannie and Freddie in 2003 and 2004, the two GSEs (government-sponsored enterprises) figured that their one saving grace with Democrat champions in Congress was producing "affordable" housing so they decided to do a LOT more of it:

“Subprime and Alt-A originations in the U.S. rose from less than 8% of all mortgages in 2003 to over 20% in 2006." (WSJ)

Read the entire link that I provided. It details all of the issues surrounding Obama's associations with radical people and groups. If you do not care to learn about Obama, fine. Go into that good night happily.

But, the fact that Obama was involved in 1995 with this financial crisis to come does not bother you, then there is no hope. You will support him blindly regardless of the facts.

Tom,

Yes you are correct that Barney Frank was the ranking minority member of the house finance committee, later to be chairperson, but in 2003 the Republicans held majority, as a result, all committees and sub committees were chaired by a Republicans and membership majority was Republican. The chairperson sets the agenda. The ball was in the hands of Republican house members, not ACORN or Barney Frank.

Lastly, William Donaldson, former SEC chief, forewarned GWB and others of the pending Fannie and Freddie problems and requested the administration to take action years back. His advice was not heeded by GWB, and the chief went the way of many of administration secretaries and department heads. They were either pushed out or resigned in disgust.

John McCain once sent birthday greetings to Joe Bonano, head of the Bonano crime syndicate, when Bonano moved to Arizona.

Does that mean a McCain administration would be run by the mob? No. Any more than an Obama administration would be run by the Weather Underground.

I mean, so what? Incidental meetings with nefarious figures are part and parcel of being a public person. Especially when today's hero is tomorrow's villain and vice versa.

Molly: "William Donaldson, former SEC chief, forewarned GWB and others of the pending Fannie and Freddie problems and requested the administration to take action years back. His advice was not heeded by GWB, and the chief went the way of many of administration secretaries and department heads. They were either pushed out or resigned in disgust."

That's a plausible scenario. George Bush is indistinguishable from a Democrat on diversity-multiculturalism issues, his open borders/amnesty agenda being just one example. And, yes, Bush, too, was a supporter (if not a very active one) of lowered lending standards to "close the [home] ownership gap.

2002 - June - George W. Bush, at the White House Conference on Increasing Minority Ownership: ". . . few(er) than half of the Hispanics and half the African Americans own the home . . . We’ve got to work to knock down the barriers that have created a homeownership gap.” (7)

"Knocking down barriers" is what Clinton, Bush, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd (chairman of the Senate Financial Services commitee), and scores and scores of other Democrats and leftist and business groups did. Economist Stan Leibowitz:

"In an attempt to increase homeownership, particularly by minorities and the less affluent, an attack on underwriting standards was undertaken by virtually every branch of the government since the early 1990s. The decline in mortgage underwriting standards was universally praised as 'innovation' in mortgage lending by regulators, academic specialists, (government-sponsored enterprises) and housing activists."

.

Where I live, I don't get much direct news coverage from the US. Only CNN International, and occasional Fox News direct feed. I tried to sit through some Fox the other night to find out what happened in the debate, and the anchor was "reporting" the ACORN "story". I wondered how long it would take for the Fox parrots to start squawking here. Wow that was fast.

"Most of us do not consider ACORN a radical group."

http://tinyurl.com/3m36pe

Same mentality that sees Palin as a cross dressing Dick Cheney on steroids and acid while handling snakes in the chapel and planning a shutdown and prison time for all Planned Parenthood offices/staff.

If you read the mission statements for ACORN, it appears that they are working towards noble causes. However, when they try to load voter registrations with only potential Democrat voters, including fake names, the deceased, and the like, they cross the line, as had been noted in many states prior to this election. When they take government money (and our/my money), then they have an obligation to conduct themselves in a non-partisan manner. If they are working for the poor, I don't have a problem with that as long as it is done in a non-partisan manner.
When the House Democrats attempted to get them an appropration of $20+ BILLION dollars in the bailout plan, this REEKS.

However, when they try to load voter registrations with only potential Democrat voters, including fake names, the deceased, and the like, they cross the line, as had been noted in many states prior to this election.

Do you have any proof that this happened?

“It’s all Barney Frank’s fault, cause Bushie was too timid”

Tom and ORR – how can you expect us to take you seriously?

Most of us do not take “one link” and let it do our thinking – especially when that link includes in the third sentence the phrases “Underground bombers” and “Communist Party member”. Fair and balanced it ain’t gonna be. You want a credible link? If it’s statistics, .gov works for me. If it’s praise for the Dems’, it’ll carry weight when it’s from Washingtontimes.com. Anything coming from the NYT with undisputed praise for the Rep’s should be taking seriously.

I previously had checked out the “Jimmy Carter, Main Culprit” Claim. Carter indeed used the bully pulpit to encourage the deposit of national funds into lower income areas. There was no mandate, only the reasoned plea that – as long as ya gotta park federal money, ya might as well put where folks can use it. There was NO Mandate – and no “Forcing” of banks to make loans to low income, high risk customers.” In fact the documents .. readily available in the presidential libraries .. expressly said (paraphrased) to use the money with care. Last week I posed a few links showing those details.

Phil Gramm may have been a PhD economist and former Texas Senator … but he was also the one the authored the bill – which Clinton signed – that expressly created what Phil Gramm has now apparently called, "a vast extortion scheme … ” It was HIS bill that took restrictions off Banks. I posed a few of those links too.

REGARDLESS … I see now the wisdom: the increase in “Subprime and Alt-A originations in the U.S. rose from less than 8% of all mortgages in 2003 to over 20% in 2006" (WSJ) was due to Obama in ’95, or Barney in ’03, or Carter in ‘77. Got it!

Seriously dudes – Inside the Capital Beltway they are almost all power hungry egoists: Money, Power, TV Fame and Perks. That’s it. No gang is better than the other, no matter how loudly you claim “Fair and balanced”.

"When the House Democrats attempted to get them an appropration of $20+ BILLION dollars in the bailout plan, this REEKS"

Do tell, etw

Lots of straw men, there, JDR.

It's a solid diversionary tactic.

You wouldn't want readers to dwell too long on the immense damage the Democratic Party has inflicted on America --- which I've illustrated above.

Tossing out a bunch of straw men just might divert their attention. I don't know. But I'll take a minute to take show how you operate.

JDR: "I see now the wisdom: the increase in “Subprime and Alt-A originations in the U.S. rose from less than 8% of all mortgages in 2003 to over 20% in 2006" (WSJ) was due to Obama in ’95, or Barney in ’03, or Carter in ‘77. Got it!"

Of course, I made no connection between the SURGE in high risk loans from 2003 to 2006 to "Obama '95" or to "Carter in '77". That's the straw "men".

I made no connection. Yet, you wrote that I did. What sort of person does that? Why?

I DID to however, link the SURGE in high risk loans from 2003-2006 to "Barney in '03" --- and to Democrats generally. How was I able to do this?
Excerpt from the Wall Street Journal:

It is important to understand that, as GSEs, Fannie and Freddie were viewed in the capital markets as government-backed buyers (a belief that has now been reduced to fact). Thus they were able to borrow as much as they wanted for the purpose of buying mortgages and mortgage-backed securities. Their buying patterns and interests were followed closely in the markets. If Fannie and Freddie wanted subprime or Alt-A loans, the mortgage markets would produce them. By late 2004, Fannie and Freddie very much wanted subprime and Alt-A loans. Their accounting had just been revealed as fraudulent, and they were under pressure from Congress to demonstrate that they deserved their considerable privileges. Among other problems, economists at the Federal Reserve and Congressional Budget Office had begun to study them in detail, and found that -- despite their subsidized borrowing rates -- they did not significantly reduce mortgage interest rates. In the wake of Freddie's 2003 accounting scandal, Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan became a powerful opponent, and began to call for stricter regulation of the GSEs and limitations on the growth of their highly profitable, but risky, retained portfolios.

If they were not making mortgages cheaper and were creating risks for the taxpayers and the economy, what value were they providing? The answer was their affordable-housing mission. So it was that, beginning in 2004, their portfolios of subprime and Alt-A loans and securities began to grow. Subprime and Alt-A originations in the U.S. rose from less than 8% of all mortgages in 2003 to over 20% in 2006. During this period the quality of subprime loans also declined, going from fixed rate, long-term amortizing loans to loans with low down payments and low (but adjustable) initial rates, indicating that originators were scraping the bottom of the barrel to find product for buyers like the GSEs.

The strategy of presenting themselves to Congress as the champions of affordable housing appears to have worked. Fannie and Freddie retained the support of many in Congress, particularly Democrats, and they were allowed to continue unrestrained. Rep. Barney Frank (D., Mass), for example, now the chair of the House Financial Services Committee, openly described the "arrangement" with the GSEs at a committee hearing on GSE reform in 2003: "Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have played a very useful role in helping to make housing more affordable . . . a mission that this Congress has given them in return for some of the arrangements which are of some benefit to them to focus on affordable housing." The hint to Fannie and Freddie was obvious: Concentrate on affordable housing and, despite your problems, your congressional support is secure.*

*Blame Fannie Mae and Congress For the Credit Mess
Wall Street Journal
SEPTEMBER 23, 2008
By CHARLES W. CALOMIRIS and PETER J. WALLISON

Mr. Calomiris is a professor of finance and economics at Columbia Business School and a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. Mr. Wallison, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, was general counsel of the Treasury Department in the Reagan administration.

quit trying to change their minds. obama owns them.

I'll repeat what I posted yesterday in reply to another letter:

http://blog.news-record.com/opinion/letters/archives/2008/09/on_education_obama.shtml#comment-614384

lilbean, do we see any evidence that they actually HAVE minds?

We can point fingers at almost any mistake ever made. We can do it.

Just for fun, I'll blame John McCain and 4 others associated with a certain individual. On that note, look how much business Fannie and Fred did before the S&L crisis and realize how much slack they had to pick up after.

N-n-n-next, I'll blame Lyndon Johnson for taking Fan off the federal books in 1968 and listing its shares...shifting the mission of the companies less towards backing the housing market and more towards ppppprofits.

Lastly, I blame Fat King George. I mean, all he had to do was give us some representation in Parliament.

I hear ya Tom .. and I'm not defending the Clinton appointed "Leaders" .. but neither and I tossing out diversions ... like "Carter did it" ... as is seen so often here and elsewhere.

This "list of villains in boldface" may be a more fair representation"

http://www.slate.com/id/2200160/

You either know this or refuse to see the obvious.

Please show where "a hint to Fannie and Freddie" became Barney Frank "forcing" the gurus of wall street to make loans for "affordable" housing without so much as a credit check let alone to those without so much as a job.

No the grunts of wall street knew it was a fools mission but everyone was making so much money the gurus couldn't stop. It was pure fools-gold greed.

btw .. I often rail against "EEEVVILLLL Corporations. The crux is they get too big and too powerful, devouring all competition and encouraging if not mandating corruption. Some would argue I'm a Code-Pink person .. I put forth Fannie and Freddy as great examples of my righteousness.

--

btw - too bad Barney Frank was not FOR the Surge in 2003. He could have singlehandedly prevented the debacle we call Iraq - and the trillion dollars wasted there would fully fund the current Wall Street debacle. He's such a big powerful man, that Barney Frank .. kinda makes ones groin itch, huh Tom?

Carol and Molly the Dog,

If you havent seen that ACORN has issues in several areas then you havent looked very hard.

Mick, I can't find any...show me pleeze