Op Ed: Political Image, Fantastic Fortune,Hangs on Lies, Distortion

(EUGENE, Ore.) - A fact is a fact IS a FACT!! -- Right? By definition: “fact (as in "reality") n. an event known to have happened or something known to have existed.”

Ever since the Enlightenment, many millions worldwide have come to depend on “the facts of the matter” as the primary means for understanding --and then taking action-- on every issue, problem, policy and pattern, in both learning and life.

That’s no longer true --by absolute necessity --in the realities of this politicized world.

“Spin” has become the weapon of choice to produce distortion, perversion and the royal road to imperial power --provided by “consultants” lushly funded by corporate dues-paid to produce results difficult-to-impossible to get otherwise.

Politics, by definition, is the involved and complex set of social relationships involving power.

These days, increasingly, that has come to include the distribution of wealth; and thus the formation of capital --always the driving engine for creation of more wealth.

Money --in many forms and often “covered”-- is the medium sure to facilitate and ease the accumulation and application of power.

We’ve learned “the hard way” how true that is for America, over the past forty years, by the imposition of “the imperial Presidency”; distorting, perverting and finally perhaps damaging our democracy almost beyond full repair --and the essential return-to-Constitutionalism.

It’s no wonder so many million Americans are so deeply misled, cannily managed, too-easily manipulated and exploited by such powerful persuasive impacts; lushly funded and purposively perpetrated by those malign forces seeking to “WIN by ANY Means!”

You can easily “see with own eyes” simply by sampling the ongoing warfare waged by those ubiquitous powerfully distressing political tv-ads, ostensibly serving both candidates --but, in truth, still further damaging our tattered-torn and disintegrating democracy.

Our once-powerful and preeminent major media --presciently praised and protected by our Founding Fathers in their First Amendment to our historic Constitution-- were developed, supported and strengthened very purposely: To make sure every citizen could know-and-understand issues, problems and their solutions; as demanded for effective operation of any democracy.

But these essential channels are now owned --and thus controlled--by large consolidated and contorted corporate management, carefully constituted precisely for such purposes.

Even the strongest-and-best of our remaining journalistic “professionals” find themselves swept into contrivance and complicity simply by the weight of corporate culture and often-outlandish compensation.

The Founders sought and studied every possible source for precedent and philosophical power in putting together the component parts of our “radical” democratic governance system. (See The Federalist Papers.)

They made sure to isolate and subdue each of three essential centers-for-power; they played one-against-the others purposely.

That’s WHY we have ”the three-legged throne for democratic rule”, with Legislative, Executive and Judicial “legs”, each doing its well-designed part to uphold the whole.

That’s WHY they included “essential concepts such as separation of church-and-state” and “careful allocation to the essential state units of locally-demanded control for major functions”, such as education, among others.

They were all too aware of already-recognized deep dangers; and especially of deception, from prior experience with British exploitation.

That’s WHY canny old Ben Franklin told the inquiring lady in Philadelphia, seeking word on the shape of our emerging governance: “...A republic --if you can keep it !”.

Only recently --since the Reagan era, historical record now clearly shows-- has “covering-spin and widely-applied distortion and perversion become paramount” in all areas and levels of American politics; to isolate and separate and “simplify” (!) the perception --and thus the meanings and impacts-- of every issue, every problem, every possible solution; and, especially, “the contribution of party-in-power to what becomes ‘the real reality’ seen by citizens.”

Those seeking power-by-any-means “have no bounds of conscience, morality --or even applied-religion-- to hamper” what becomes that ceaseless surge for strength characterized by the truism: “Power corrupts...and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

What better proof of that provident statement than the facts now known about HOW and WHY we went to “entirely unwarranted ‘preemptive’ war” with Iraq??

We were seeking to plunder and prevail over not only the major oil reserves of the Middle East; but to make of those struggling nations “whatever our imperial American regime chose for them” --all in the name of “creating deeper democracy” --of course!

Has not that always been “the U.S. explanation” of all our previous plunder-and-prevail projects?

The principle of “pre-ordained, God-supported” right to “reduce the ranks of the heathens and capture the entire continent”??

The “Monroe Doctrine”?(See neocon-created Project for the New American Century, designed and developed by Cheney et al, 1998, projecting and continuing “any action justified in pursuit of our national interests and national security.”)

“Corporate campaign contributions”, made possible by long-term corporate enterprise leading to the false provision of assumed “person-hood” --and its right to political speech-- have paved the way for overwhelming dollar-power via “political-campaign contributions”; richly rewarding those seeking “falsified precedent” from a Supreme Court itself manipulated and managed “by ANY means demanded.”

But the first-and-foremost cause --justlfying deep concern for continuance unless “the broken system” is fully restored and remedied by fortification against the same thing happening again-- is the pathetic apathy with which we “as a free-and-responsble citizenry have allowed this to occur” and continue.

Given our vaunted “American exceptionalism” --understood to characterize the “wit, wisdom and will of the American people”-- and the many serious and sensitizing symptoms highly visible for decades, we must shoulder the heavy burden ourselves.

The unavoidable extreme pain, loss of young lives and huge portions of our national treasury --inevitably leading to provocation and possible forced cogitation-- may well be the most powerful process we could hope for to motivate us into the strong and Constitutional action surely right to our hand and ready Congressional application.

It was precisely for the dangers they presciently deemed so destroying and damaging that the Founders presented us with means to try and punish those who create such chaos.

That Constitutional process --already proven so potent that the last President so confronted rapidly resigned-- no longer resides remotely “off the table” in our sovereign segment of democratic governance.

It is ready and already armed in great detail by previous study and preparation recently completed.

-----------------
Reader’s Note: A précis covering LMA mehods in Op Ed research and preparation is available via request. Quotes are excerpted, shortened, summarized for space reasons; verbatim list available. As usual here, at least 50 sources, from writer’s file and professional-resource library, Internet, and special studies available to the writer were consulted in preparation; full list available.

All requests must include full ID, snail-mail and e-mail addresses, for direct contact. Op Ed content is LMA-copyright, under “fair-use” protocol.

Salem-News.com Top Stories

2025: Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst

Two Wars with No Way Out

No One Owns the Future

The Ugly Origins of Trump's America First Policy

A One-State Solution Could Transform the World

Comments Leave a comment on this story.

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.

Liisa P November 21, 2008 2:42 am (Pacific time)

The staff of Obama should be well-equipped in all aspect with this regard to the term that he/she may qualified for the position she/he may applied for that how it works of being an staff of Obama. Obama wants to know all about you if you plan to work in his Cabinet or staff. Makes sense, doesn’t it? If a person is going to hold a high-responsibility position in America’s federal government, it is in the best interests of the nation and its people that the employee meets the qualifications and not be a security risk. However, it seems to me that there are limits to what is reasonable. With as much information as Obama asks for in his seven-page, 63-question application, you’d think the administration would have enough to perform credit repair for everyone who applies. CNN leaked a copy of the questionnaire, which requires applicants not only to talk in detail about nearly everything they’ve done over the past 10 years or more, but also to do the same for their spouse. Here are a few of my favorite questions. I hope applicants do indeed get free credit repair as part of the deal… (1) Writings: Please list and, if readily available, provide a copy of each book, article, column or publication (including but not limited to any posts or comments on blogs or other Web sites) you have authored, individually or with others. Please list all aliases or “handles” you have used to communicate over the Internet. (2) Electronic communications: If you have ever sent an electronic communication, including but not limited to an E-mail, text message or instant message, that could suggest a conflict of interest or be a possible source of embarrassment to you, your family, or the President-Elect if it were made public, please describe. (3) Please provide the URL address of any Web sites that feature you in either a personal or professional capacity (e.g., Facebook, MySpace, etc.) This only scratches the surface of how deep the application goes. If you’re going to serve under the “change” president and you don’t have all your ducks in a row, you’ll have to change that right away! Click to read more on Credit Repair.

Payday Loan Advocate October 20, 2008 3:59 am (Pacific time)

The Arizona Credit Union System would be very happy if payday advance companies shriveled up and died in the Grand Canyon State, but their opinion is certainly greased by the wheels of their own commerce. The credit union is stepping up its lobbying efforts to crush the competition and absorb all the former cash advance customers into their coffers. On the flip side of the coin, Prop. 200 supports organizations like the Arizona Community Financial Services Association that claims that Proposition 200 will indeed lower state loan fees, eliminate extensions by introducing flexible payment plans, regulate Internet lending and cull the number of total walk-in stores in Arizona. These very real reforms will not only help payday loan customers, but will keep industry employees off the breadlines past the current lending sunset year of 2010. Who wants to lose their job, particularly in our current economy?

Henry Ruark October 6, 2008 8:56 am (Pacific time)

You wanna play that game ? Okay: A List of McCain's Nastiest Moments By Melissa McEwan, Shakesville Printed on October 6, 2008 http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/101204/ Earlier today, a commenter asked if John McCain is "truly as nasty and belligerent as he appears to be." Is he really that bad--or is it just one of those partisan memes that develops about an opponent? I'm guessing he isn't the only Shaker with that question, and, since detailing McCain's long list of objectionable qualities has been what one might call a specialty of mine since the inception of this blog back in '04, I figured I'd put together a little collection of Punk McNasty's Greatest Hits to answer that question and for handy-dandy reference. ----------------- Please note we did NOT show any of the long-list from this source, surely as reliable as those listed by others. That leaves open your own assessment via "see with own eyes" and own mind. BUT I did check out whole list and recommend you do so, too.

Henry Ruark October 4, 2008 8:28 am (Pacific time)

To all: Steven Pinker is leading cognitive scientist/linguist with whole series of books to his worldwide credit. I've used his materials for years, can tell you many top corporate, media, political consultants do so also. Here's his NYT take on the debate: www.nytimes.com Everything You Heard Is Wrong By STEVEN PINKER "SINCE the vice presidential debate on Thursday night, two opposing myths have quickly taken hold about Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska. The first, advanced by her supporters, is that she made it through a gantlet of fire; the second, embraced by her detractors, is that her speaking style betrays her naïveté. Both are wrong. "Let’s take the first myth: Governor Palin subjected herself to the most demanding test possible — a televised debate. By surviving, she won. As the front page of The Daily News of New York screamed this morning, “No Baked Alaska.” "But as a test of clear thinking, the debate format was far less demanding than a face-to-face interview — the kind Ms. Palin had with Katie Couric of CBS." --------------- Any working journalist you know will confirm precisely that difference, which Pinker outlines in much more detail. "See with own eyes" and then evaluate with own mind.

Henry Ruark October 3, 2008 10:24 am (Pacific time)

To all: Here's "see with own eyes" minute-by-minute comment on VP-debate, with only sample to start you, before you use the link: DEBATE ANALYSIS: A Minute by Minute Look at Biden vs. Palin By Staff, Think Progress Posted on October 2, 2008 http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/http://www.thinkprogress.org//101390/ Editor's note: The folks over at Think Progress did a great job live-blogging tonight's debate, here's their minute by minute analysis: "10:32: Palin bragged that as governor, she has appointed people “regardless of political affiliation.” However, high school affiliation has been very important. As the New York Times noted, “The Wasilla High School yearbook archive now doubles as a veritable directory of state government.” Palin has appointed her former junior high band-mate, among others."

Henry Ruark October 2, 2008 8:28 am (Pacific time)

To all: For those still in doubt about current events, can recommend direct-reading in Adam Smith and Federalist Papers. Surprising, even unnerving, to find prescience shared there for precipitation of precisely what we have suffered in the past, are now suffering again, and will continue to suffer until/unless we apply what the Constitution provides as the essential remedy.

Henry Clay Ruark September 28, 2008 8:07 am (Pacific time)

"All for ourselves, and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind." Adam Smith - The Wealth Of Nations

Henry Ruark September 25, 2008 8:49 am (Pacific time)

Percy: Re "thumbs up" on Obama fundsraiser: Same day you admit distortions already offered here and then furnish ID and date for Op Ed. Okay, friend ? Ready when you are...either Op Ed or direct via ID to Editor confidential, if indeed you have reason to fear honest, open disclosure.

Henry Ruark September 25, 2008 8:46 am (Pacific time)

To all: See my last Comment to Percy Sanchez, under Wall Street story still current. To P. (sorry !): You wrote" Facts are the enemies of radicals". That depends on how --and when--you define "radicals". J/C was "radical"; B. Franklin was "radical" (remember his "We hang together--or separately !"; FDR was "radical"; JFK was "radical". So was Gramm; so was Reagan; so was Bush I; so is Cheney, Bush II, Wolfowitz, Perle, et al. WHO are YOU to determine the truthful definition? YOU still hide behind mask of non-ID when asked, politely and repeatedly, to show yourself. You it is who denies, defies honest, open offer for full room for detailed presentation here --WHY ? SO, since you so dissatisfied here, why not spend your big nickel somewhere else ? I doubt if we will miss you very much...and if you feel driven to return, when can we expect your ID and Op Ed(s) ? That'll "make my day" !!

Percy September 24, 2008 6:16 pm (Pacific time)

Henry et al still waiting to see you give the thumbs up on Obama's Finance Chairwoman and her incredible past. You will not I guess, and informed individuals know the reasons. Let's see what happens when his buddy (who bankrolled his earlier campaigns) gets sentenced to prison next month and other past and present associations get more "light." Also when you mention various polls it's wise to point out how they are "weighted". You understand that process, right? You also familiar with just what a "push poll" is, also? I would say that the Rasmussen poll gives one the most accurate snapshot. Things will get really intense in the next few months and that "youtube" watcher giving links re: healthcare should get quite an education, finally. Facts are the enemy of the radicals.

Henry Ruark September 24, 2008 4:41 pm (Pacific time)

Percy: Don't look now, too embarrassing for you ! But your naivete taking over when you lose focus, as in your charge tha YouTube has become "radical"... Still owned by same perps who control practically all media channels, still driven by same profit uber alles as other market mechanisms, still under same forces to change as other parts of capitalistic system. HOW change cometh is the key, NOT whether it will arrive ! IF peaceful change on rational, realistic basis prevented long enough by enough greed, and more dastardly debacles, it will STILL arrive...wrapped in real revolt as never since 1776. "Radical" still beats "Revolutionary", and can be accomplished with much less blood-and-guts/splashed, too.

Henry Ruark September 24, 2008 9:59 am (Pacific time)

P.S:
I repeat, sir, you lie in your teeth, You wrote:
"We certainly need a better healthcare delivery system here, but we need to minimize the governments involvement. Look at what they did to other private enterprises when they got involved. The radicals simply do not know how to do anything other than tax and spend. Plus, who is going to pay for it, and how?"

WHO has been the true radical element attacking Constitutional governance ever since the Reagan regime that gave us Iran/Contra as the root to preemptive Iraq War today, costing at least THREE TRILLIONS ?

Yours puts history on its head since Reagan, Bush I, Bush II and neocon cabal rooted in all three, have all enlarged size of government, multiplied the military, minimized social safety net, slashed away tax support for all functions to "kill the beast", and otherwise cavorted wildly while coalescing those neocon conscienceless distortions and perversions of democratic and Constitutional governance.

So our choice is to return to that dispensing station for more of that same now-bitter medicine ?

My favorite Western Sheriff in a famous film has recurring line for all such situations:
"NOT Hardly !"

Henry Ruark September 24, 2008 2:12 pm (Pacific time)

To all: Special added-service today for your attention to changing total on the election, per our re substantiality of polls. See last lines here: The Los Angeles Times, New York Times, and USA Today lead with the continuing bailout politics as the Bush administration sent some of its top officials to Capitol Hill yesterday in an effort to convince lawmakers they need to pass the $700-billion plan as soon as possible. Instead of falling in line as many had expected, Congressional opposition to the bailout seems to be growing every day. The men of the hour, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, appeared before the Senate Banking Committee to push lawmakers toward action. In what USAT calls perhaps his "darkest economic assessment" since becoming chairman, Bernanke warned that the current crisis is unlike anything the country has ever seen and failing to approve the bailout would have "significant adverse consequences for the average person." Despite these dire predictions, Congressional opposition, particularly from Republicans in the House, was so strong that by last night "it was no longer certain that a version of the Paulson-Bernanke plan could win passage," the LAT declares. The Wall Street Journal banners, and the NYT off-leads, news that Warren Buffett will invest $5 billion in Goldman Sachs. The WSJ calls the cash infusion by the famous investor "one of the biggest expressions of confidence in the financial system since the credit crisis intensified early this month." Financial stocks, including Goldman's, surged in after-hours trading as Buffett's decision "immediately heartened investors," says the NYT. The Washington Post leads with a new presidential election poll that suggests the economic turmoil is helping Barack Obama, who now has the first clear lead in the general-election campaign. Among likely voters, Obama leads John McCain by 52 percent to 43 percent. A mere 9 percent rated the economy as good or excellent, and 50 percent cited it as the most important issue. That undoubtedly helps Obama, who has a sizable advantage as the candidate best suited to handle the current financial crisis."

Henry Ruark September 24, 2008 1:48 pm (Pacific time)

"See also" new ref. re Reagan initiation of current debacle, from Robert Parry, in my last Comment on Wall Street story.

Percy September 24, 2008 12:35 pm (Pacific time)

Joshua you base your background on Global Heathcare via youtube? That is exactly what the radicals want you to do!

Henry Ruark September 24, 2008 8:39 am (Pacific time)

To all: See my Comment under Wall Street story above.

Henry Ruark September 24, 2008 8:36 am (Pacific time)

To all: Thank you, Josh. eMac on partial strike here, so could not unearth the fine set of links you supply. Neocon-review comment here about "failing film" decried, denied by impacts already on record around the world.

Joshua September 23, 2008 8:06 pm (Pacific time)

Watch SICKO by Michael Moore, (it's in 13 parts; also available on YouTube when the first part appears) and decide for yourself why the US rates under nearly every other industrialized nation in the world for healthcare for it's citizens. I can't think of any better reason than MONEY. Can you?
Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPpjh-3Gr58
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiMMkmGdf_s
Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaBbbWZi5ks
Part 4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t59EK6rIpsc
Part 5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWXfTTATfYc
Part 6: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X45msp2gSps
Part 7: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBJbvKmx5AY
Part 8: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBBOh1MS-KA
Part 9: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lDmOMgBW38
Part 10: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wdfj3zSFcU
Part 11: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TuS9B5t_5eQ
Part 12: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDuM9JMM2y4
Part 13: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECtbXnhLcrE

Henry Ruark September 23, 2008 8:02 pm (Pacific time)

P.S.: You are absolutely correct, sir. Only problem is, as with most neocon claims, you simply put the facts upside down. The radicals are those who have been at work ever since Reagan arrived. IF you check the historical record, you will find the facts put the onus directly where it belongs --as did the Op Ed. For instance, check the graphic with Op Ed to see who and when and where the high points actually occurred. Do the same for size of government, employee count, costs publicly recorded, unemployment numbers, and your own choice of other key values, to see the truth as it actually occurred. Would you trust masked man at your family door, knocking with only name, refusing to tell you WHO he is, WHERE he came from, WHY he is visiting you, and SOURCE of his statements ? P.S., when do you plan to put up your own Op Ed ??? Have heavy bet we will never see same or hear your name again after Nov. 4.

Percy Sanchez September 23, 2008 6:37 pm (Pacific time)

The Canadian system is failing their citizens miserably. Canadians with the financial ability come here. Currently pregnant women who are projected to have difficult birthing's are staged close to the border near American hospitals. The wait time for services is such that people die for lack of a diagnosis that an MRI or similar procedure could provide because of the long (getting longer) wait time. I could go on but most readers have probably already seen news reports on this crumbling healthcare system in Canada and throughout europe. We certainly need a better healthcare delivery system here, but we need to minimize the governments involvement. Look at what they did to other private enterprises when they got involved. The radicals simply do not know how to do anything other than tax and spend. Plus, who is going to pay for it, and how?

Henry Ruark September 23, 2008 5:19 pm (Pacific time)

To all: Here's highly relevant link from NYTIMES: Breaking News Alert The New York Times Tuesday, September 23, 2008 -- 7:15 PM ET ----- McCain Aide's Firm Was Paid by Freddie Mac One of the giant mortgage companies at the heart of the credit crisis paid $15,000 a month to a firm owned by Senator John McCain's campaign manager from the end of 2005 through last month, according to two people with direct knowledge of the arrangement. The disclosure contradicts a statement Sunday night by Mr. McCain that the campaign manager, Rick Davis, had no involvement with the company for the last several years. Read More: http://www.nytimes.com/?e

Henry Ruark September 23, 2008 5:12 pm (Pacific time)

To all: From file, here is excerpt from 60-pp. PDF from leading healthcare professional journal. It is cited here to show the complexity of comparison, and the realities of such attempts in general. Specifics of healthcare result in various nations will folo as time permits, but this provided simply to frame the dialog in sensible, sensitive reality carefully avoided by those who refuse fully detailed Op Ed coverage. Watch for upcoming Op Ed on this specific issue, soon, as result of research already under way prior to this Op Ed series, for other LMA purposes still in work. Here's the excerpt: (Source withheld as LMA ethical right during further work.) In contrast, the U.S. government finances only 45 percent of healthcare services, and the overwhelming majority of health facilities are privately owned, either on a not-for-profit or a for-profit basis. The difference in funding and organization among countries of similar wealth points to the overarching importance of national character in determining the balance between public and private sectors in health services organization and financing. Canadian economist Robert Evans highlighted the importance of national character (political ethos) in determining the most appropriate healthcare system (Craig 1999): Nations do not borrow other nations’ institutions. The Canadian system may be “better” than the American. . . . Even if it is better, I am not trying to sell it to you. You cannot have it. It would not “fit” because you do not see the world, or the individual, or the state, as we do. . . . The point is that by examining other people’s experience you can extend your range of perception of what is possible." --------- Oveer-simplified consideration of complex issues is obvious cause of such neocon policy disasters as we are currently suffering. That is why any peripheral comment, mine or anyone's, as occurs here in Comment, is best amplified, organized, explined, justified, and documented by fully detailed professional exploration and report = Op Ed. We do our best for you that way; and so can anyone else with dedication enough to produce reality rather than piffle and political pander. moretocome is sign-off on copy segments in wire service work. Mine here promises more, with solid basis in facts checkable,coming as time allows me to produce it for you. Considering nickel-level, I think we do damned well now for you. What do you think ? Where's anything similar from others piffling and pandering re this and other issues ??

Henry Ruark September 23, 2008 4:22 pm (Pacific time)

R.M: Sorry to shortchange your last, but time presseth here. SO see mine to P.S which fits pretty well for you, too. Nothing personal vs either of you, simply fed up with easy-ride, cheap-shot, behind-tree s...(Stuff !) from too many... You will understand or not, don't give damn either way at my advanced age. Re "impressive", NOT so intended, only reaction to uncalled-for, "unclean", nasty note re "mouth" and qualifying work experience. "I have often, with some justification, been termed an argumentative loudmouth" -that is lead sentence in Editorial from 50,000-circ. media mag I published in Chicago,picked up in other national educational journals --cited here simply for record as inoculating me vs any similar shot here since serves as simple "mea culpa". That "loudmouth principle" is driving engine for most Op Eds, whether so openly said or not... SO where's YOURS ? With links, sources, and full details, welcome here anytime per 8th invitation to YOU so far... OR is there really reason for your non-ID, as needed for Op Ed-room here ??

Henry Ruark September 23, 2008 4:09 pm (Pacific time)

Percy S.: If willing to add last-name, why not full-ID, even if sent in fear and confidentially to Editor if any true reason ? THEN you can do full Op Ed on all those massive American healthcare deficiencies many people now suffering, reported widely nationally; and how to cure without nationalizing whole system ? OR do you have any reasonable further interest than to try to force further distraction here from main points covered? Re Alinski's Radical Rules, that reveals your values and your sources, too, as Far Right and frantic since that set of sheets produced for defensive purposes demanded by failed-group unable to make sensible progress politically otherwise. Re healthcare in socialist systems, in work already for other purposes, will share when finished. Can expedite as LMA project if you wish to pay LMA rates. Meanwhile when do we see your first of series of Op Eds, with "seeing eyes"link, and full source documentation for checkout ? Mine available with ID to Editor for choice, since time demanded at my cost here, which surely seems fair. You put up ID, I put up data, and if necessary set up LMA work at your cost. Nickel here does not buy you comprehensive coverage, only what's already listed for any one Op Ed. Do you offer same backup for your Comments ??

Percy Sanchez September 23, 2008 12:05 pm (Pacific time)

There are many claims by people who will not provide proof (hint: doesn't exist!) that there are various countries that have a healthcare system that provides superior healthcare based on a socialistic framework which is superior to America's various programs. Mike Moore made a movie about this, but it failed miserably. Generally when you ask these people to provide proof, they change the subject and attempt to put the questioner/inquirer on the defensive. A simple reading of Alinsky's Ten Rules for Radicals will give even the casual reader a peek into this method and the obvious weakness of the people who use this infantile debate style. Facts just don't apply to some I guess.

Rich Millison September 23, 2008 9:24 am (Pacific time)

Henry re:WV 6:22 and your impressive resume. I will save you from a task you cannot succeed in: There is no "regime" on the planet that is providing healthcare via a socialistic methodology that is working in the best interest of the patient compared to our system, as flawed as it is. If you could document one by just naming it that would take what, a few seconds? Enlighten us as per your below assertions, thanks.

Henry Ruark September 23, 2008 8:42 am (Pacific time)

W.V.: In usual prof. preparation for LMA assignment expected from you, ran simple content analysis on some of your content. Nothing like knowing client to meet his demanding needs, esp. if anticipating rejection of his philosophies. Consultant's prof. function is to produce communication needed no matter what his own views or values may be...that is what client pay for. Also that's base for $250 per hour, which pays for years of background, great detail from files, and muchmorelikethat... So here's what you wrote, to which I now attach that word "revealing": "During my nearly 30 years in the military I have been all over the world and socialists/marxists are all the same, constantly berating individual freedoms (demonizing success of others) and soft-pedaling socialist policies---think "slippery slope", "...getting the camel's nose under the tent...". Just look at the unemployment rate in Europe, you want that? The socialistic healthcare policies there as well as Canada is/are abysmal, you want that?" Allathat is simple personal feeling-expressed, without any sign of demanded specificity or source or documentation, thus obviously unanswerable until those details forced out somehow. What that tells me also is your lifelong commitment to militarism as career. Thank God for some who do so, (my grandson is Ranger on search assignment in Afg.) but we do NOT have to guide rest of our lives on what that lifestyle, surely biased and removed from life here, teaches us. Your intensities felt and properly appreciated but still irrelevant for demanded solutions here, now, somehow. I note that you do NOT mention any country, or name any system which you denigrate, thus stalling any further analysis. Your only somewhat specific points are on jobless-rate in Europe, and on healthcare in Canada, both in error now, albeit perhaps what you state last time you checked. SO forgive mine re "sleep", and with sincere appreciation re your long and surely dedicated and patriotic service to us all. Nevertheless,mine re Op Ed still stands --with that "very checkered career", similar to mine in exceptionally more difficult areas, you most surely have much to share here with the rest of us enforced stay-at-homes. SO let's cut the political pander-crud, and get on with the realistic issues we now face, such as rising wise dialog over the demanded W/St. payoff, the also-rising major inequalities for incomes in the nation, the continuing stagnation of wages, the ongoing descent into deep doldrums for education, and the millions awaitng any access to health care --while the fat cats fly their latest tax-snatches to overseas shelters, and the offshoring of jobs continues, draining what little wealth creation here is still possible via the remnant of our once-actual/product production slumps still further and deeper. No wonder you could not sleep, given these real issues. SO, what do YOU recommend, NOW starting with Yes or No on the record-setting bailout ? Then you can respond to mine re impeachment, too: "NOW, Later, or NEVER ?!" Many others remain ready here for your further cogitation and response...you might even feel you need Op Ed(s) to answer these !! For military man with all that time, you surely now have no problem in speaking up. Op Ed best way to do so since it gives you full, demanding opportunity to "get it all out where others can see" and then evaluate --and THEN comment, too.

Henry Ruark September 22, 2008 9:23 pm (Pacific time)

WV 6:22: For your nickel, I should do major consulting and reporting job ? Estimate: about two hours, that's $250-worth. Thank you, NO. BUT if you will ID to Editor, for direct to me as if face-to-face, will be happy to set you up with not only sources but solid documentation for every word written. For cheap-shot unwilling to act in good faith via ID when requested, why should I do otherwise ? So await your ID to Editor, with name, street address, email, and telephone. Might even spring for Senseo, after you recover wit and will, and prove up good faith by full response to above. OR you can prove-same by simple act of providing those you stated were so badly behind us, if you can do so now, here, as dialog in this open, honest, democratic channel. We demonstrate that kind of dialog every day from others willing to share, and learn, and stay calm. But of course you can always take Op Ed approach, too, as per invitations repeated here. Those inv. are sincere, intended to encourage anyone able to act with continued civility even if somewhat provoked (character test),then write sensibly, and set out detailed, documented data to share with readership. That's same risk we do every time we publish, story OR Op Ed. For others, LMA rates and full client list available rapidly. Time somewhat limited but will make exception for you.

Henry Ruark September 22, 2008 6:55 pm (Pacific time)

percy: Thy name remains persiflage, friend Percy. Your own statements deride their ability to decide, esp. now, and you admit meekly any break in sensationalistic stuff can upset and demote any meaning, even that you add. So why sub such stuff for cogent content, if indeed you have any ? Issue dialog might assist others, even though cuts down that precious sense of self so evident for your cheer. Understand your necessity to see name-here or disappear, but credibility already crawled away, so you might's well hit the hay...sleep well and dream some more, you might even come up with a final snore, but until then we will continue to ignore. When we know the score, you can return some more to mourn and whine neocon sure decline.

WV September 22, 2008 6:22 pm (Pacific time)

Henry you said: "Re "socialism", depends on what level, kind and system you are really characterizing. There is solid evidence that some forms, with some kinds of service for their participants, does better than we do for them. Healthcare, for example, in several other regimes, and baby survival, and adult employment, among other elements. Misinformation propagated for decades by some proponents of other competing forms of governance have distored and even perverted how we in the U.S.understand relationships which make up governance." Once again, since you claimed their existence, please document the regimes that have superior healthcare. Proof is in the pudding I like to say. Yes this should be interesting.

Henry Ruark September 22, 2008 11:53 am (Pacific time)

WV: You wrote: "Socialism is toxic to our way of life,..." That's uninhibited personal conclusion exhibiting "where you are" precisely as mine re "regimes" may have --for you. No proof given but YOUR view assumed as correct, all others dominantly denied. Thus you reduce required fully reasonable dialog to damnably direct confrontation --either unknowingly or by intent. Either way only possible shot for further sharing/learning comes from direct challenge to that view, so becomes one more proof of necessity for Op Ed with 1000-wd chance to prove up your point, if you can... When may we expect yours re this vital, essential, now requested full proof of what you assert so knowingly ? We might just get to basic beliefs, values, world experience, and historical definitions given that kind of conversation. That surely is function of open, honest, democratic dialog channel --with Op Eds to provide potential, motivate and possibly even elucidate. IF you not prepared for that, can hardly assume we will just roll over, partake of your imparted wisdom, and play further political pandering game...too much at stake with tipping-point election already shadowing our future life, in this nation, if any possible. OR if you prefer, come direct with ID to Editor and we can cut this one up, too, without distraction and detraction on this channel for others who prefer much deeper essential review that simple p/pander.

Percy September 22, 2008 11:43 am (Pacific time)

Chloe polls will be going up and down till they start breaking away probably by mid-October. If you look at the internal data in the polls, you will be able to tell who will probably be breaking away. National polls are a personality contest to some degree, which is fluid as per the scandal du jour of the day/week. The following internals bode well for one candidate, because it is the battleground states that will decide the winner: "A new poll of rural voters in battleground states shows John McCain with a 10 point lead over Barack Obama. McCain leads 51-41, has nearly caught up with Obama as a good manager of the economy and has tied his Democratic rival as a change agent. Also, the poll shows McCain's running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, is popular with rural voters. The survey was conducted Sept. 16-18 in 13 swing states, such as New Mexico, Colorado and Missouri. If it contains any bad news for McCain, it's that he may lag George W. Bush's 2004 performance in rural areas. That's not for sure, though. At this time four years ago, Republican pollster Bill Greener and Democratic pollster Anna Greenberg -- who've been taking the survey for the Center for Rural Strategies in Whitesburg, Ky. -- found Bush with a 13-point lead over John Kerry among rural voters. That survey tested fewer likely voters (536) and had a larger margin of error (plus or minus 4.4 percent) than this month's (742 likely voters and plus or minus 3.6 percent, respectively). On Election Day four years ago, Bush won rural voters nationwide by 20 points. Who knows if McCain can meet that mark." (Excerpt) Read more at trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com ...

Percy September 22, 2008 10:59 am (Pacific time)

There are certain points that occasionally need to be repeated, and one is the far Left’s practice of projection. Something taught in Psych 101 classes, it’s the psychological trait of ascribing characteristics to one’s adversary that actually apply to oneself. Whether intentionally or subconsciously,the far Left are consummate masters of this. Inasmuch as those on the far Left are internationalists also, it is no surprise that they be alarmed at recent developments in the current presidential election cycle in America. The choice of Sarah Palin has gained Republican nominee Sen. John McCain massive ground, while the camp of Democrat nominee Sen. Barack Obama has reacted like someone reflexively blowing soda pop through their nose after a shock. I realize that for some they will never accept the clear facts/evidence that when you give money to those who cannot pay it back it will set you up for financial ruin if the total amounts of collective loans are as big as they were for Fannie and Freddie. This what was put into motion in 1999 by the Clinton Administration. I've done my best, so as they say you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make the drink it. The horse ends uo dying people.

Henry Clay Ruark September 22, 2008 10:48 am (Pacific time)

W.V.: Appreciate your grudging partial ID, displaying (did not write "revealing" !) your particular bias, surely fully acceptable even though only partial AND surely grudging. Your points demand Op Ed with full detail, country names, records re their rates you denigrate, et al, et al. Can supply same-stuff from my side of dialog, no sweat !! In all sincerity invite you to do same; that makes it then worth time to rebut as work here may make possible, with whomever does best laying all facts out for readership here They can then use links we provide to "seewithowneyes" and then evaluatewithownmind --laying aside our dual skilled persuasive words, obviously meant to be provocative, too,for use here. Truth demands ability to recognize and appreciate it, often disabled by longtime life experience, sometimes leading to denial, and always to hard-headed obstruction for changing conditions and times. (Mea culpa if/when needed !) Your points partially valid, demand far more detail, time, study and documentation than possible in this little box. SO invite your Op Ed, will be delight to folo-on when and if you present it here. IF you prefer, ID to Editor and we can cut this up direct allowing me to share much more than possible otherwise, and with full-shot for you, too !! Doubly appreciate your participation since each time strengthens demanded civil response in detail via Op Ed, and each time-avoided also strengthens conclusion it is motivated by more than effort needed. Your content, style, points, all show ability to prepare Op Ed, so what's holding you back from that proving-shot ?? Must be some reason, Right ? Pardon cap-R, inevitable here.

WV September 22, 2008 10:01 am (Pacific time)

Henry you stated that socialism works in several other "regimes" (excellent term, shows where you are) for example healthcare. Could you provide a "regime" where that is working efficiently in the best interests of patients? Socialism is toxic to our way of life, and there are those who are trying to introduce it in a "baby-step" format going back to LBJ. Just be real cautious and pay attention to what these people are spewing. During my nearly 30 years in the military I have been all over the world and socialists/marxists are all the same, constantly berating individual freedoms (demonizing success of others) and soft-pedaling socialist policies---think "slippery slope", "...getting the camel's nose under the tent...". Just look at the unemployment rate in Europe, you want that? The socialistic healthcare policies there as well as Canada is/are abysmal, you want that? While we are on the subject, Obama wants to provide healthcare for everyone, well how is he going to pay for it? Does that include illegal aliens? Our government is not even providing quality care for our veterans, so how are they going to provide for the rest of the people as well as illegal aliens, not to mention maintaining social security in it's current form? If illegals are covered then they will get SS, big time money drain from our taxpayers! By the way, SS changes that were asked to be looked at earlier, was a total volunteer type of program. Much misinformation is being bandied around about that, bottom line it would be a voluntary process and we need to do something about it real soon. Lot's of problems out there to be tackled, you want people who know what they are doing. I don't know who they would be, but I do know, that the far left radicals have already proven beyond any reasonable doubt that they cannot. They are the ones who got us in this position going back to LBJ's utterly failed socialistic/entitlement policies.

Henry Clay Ruark September 22, 2008 8:23 am (Pacific time)

Percy et al: Appreciate your point of view, in the deeper sense of that word. SO have offered you --and now repeat for 5th time-- full opportunity to state WHY in detail, depth, and disclosure of your documentation. THAT way you no longer hide behind one-name, acknowledge debt here to establish full ID if you wish credibility, and express 1st-A rights in full. Until then political pander is name of your game, complete with personal-and-name ref. and unsubstantiated b.b feel statements. No question difference in governing philosophies here; Op Ed gives you 1000-wd. shot for effective statement rather than cheap-short/stymie stuff here in little box. But ID-required as in any honest conversation --so when withheld on request can ONLY and ALWAYS mirror major reason WHY withheld. Would you talk full-tilt with masked man at door of your home ? WHY should we do so here, at door of our honest, open, democratic dialog channel ? In "town meeting" could you stand up while still masked ? Go try it, and learn !! How about any Letter to Editor for ANY other daily ? You sign with address and phone number, or save your postage and your waiting time, usually for days or even weeks --unless killed off rapidly as with most full monopoly single-paper cities. Most writing here in good faith believe this represents open, honest ongoing exchange among friends and neighbors, to share and learn --and grow. Militant malign "WIN by ANY MEANS" political pandering provides its own proper fate for most here. Why not join us in all good will ? IF you wish more room and more full attention, the answer is simple: DO your OWN Op Ed ! You might also wish to offer "see with own eyes" links, verbatim list of quotes, full access to any professional files or books or other refs. used. SO we await your honestly extended effort here, if you are honestly motivated.

Chloe September 21, 2008 9:16 pm (Pacific time)

The latest Gallup Poll daily tracking survey also showed Obama ahead, with 50 percent to McCain's 44 percent. Last Sunday, a day before stocks took a dive on Wall Street, McCain and Obama were in a statistical dead heat with McCain's 47 percent against Obama's 45 percent. There's a poll for you!!!!

Henry Ruark September 21, 2008 8:34 pm (Pacific time)

W.V. et al: You wrote:"We do not want the goverment involved in the private sector. Socialism does not work,..." In the 21at Century, in the world we now have due to globalization, there is no way to avoid government working hand in hand with the private section and --as current events clearly show-- sometimes surveilling and even controlling what is allowed to happen, in the interests of all and to offset corporate and other malign strengths. Re "socialism", depends on what level, kind and system you are really characterizing. There is solid evidence that some forms, with some kinds of service for their participants, does better than we do for them. Healthcare, for example, in several other regimes, and baby survival, and adult employment, among other elements. Misinformation propagated for decades by some proponents of other competing forms of governance have distored and even perverted how we in the U.S.understand relationships which make up governance. ID self to Editor for direct further contact in deference to other readers; or perhaps you might prefer to offer us all an Op Ed, detailing why you believe as you state. Offer is made in all sincerity and with guarantee of honest, open, democratic dialog here.

Percy S September 21, 2008 6:38 pm (Pacific time)

I would like to point out to Henry R that the senate democrats repeatedly filbustered oversight bills that the republicans brought to the floor, so let's get that straight. Also McCain and other republican senators continued to reach across the aisle to develop a plan to stop what did happen, because they obviously saw some bad things coming, which was covered in a McCain speech a few years ago.. As far as Gramm and 960,000, I am not familiar with that, BUT that is dwarfed by the now approx. 60 million by Raines and the tens of millions by Johnson, Gorelick and other operatives. Please note that Fannie May and Freddie make huge donations to democrats, with Sen. Dodd receiving the most, followed by Obama at number 2, who upon entering the senate immediately began planning for a presidential run. Then after around 140 working days he announced and began his run. That is all he has done, and still continues to get massive donations from Fannie and Freddie. I find that whole scenario troubling. We need experience not someone who reads the written speeches of David Axlerod, an individual by the way who has dual citizenship with Israel. He also was the author of that Philidelphia speech that so many thought Obama wrote. My ultimate concern, as is I believe for most Americans, is that we grow the economy, pay off our debts and continue our pursuit of happiness. Raising taxes, as the vast majority of Americans have been polled ackowlege, will not get us there.

Percy Sanchez MBA September 21, 2008 6:18 pm (Pacific time)

I have been following the below posts and it's pretty obvious that for some, it does not matter what evidence along with a documented timeline one provides, it will not change their political partisanship. I agree that it's going to doom a business when you start loaning money to people who not only do not have the means to pay it back, they are also unable to understand why they have to pay it back. The latter is something that has been promulgated by this developing entitlement mentality that started to take off around 1964. With the trillions of dollars spent sice the 60's, we have more people in poverty, the illigitimate birthrate for minorities has gone from approx. 20% in 1965 to over 70% in some urban area's. We have two presidential candidates with two very different ideologies. The entitlement system has failed, now it's time to get back to teaching and encouraging reponsible behavior. I posted the below just to show that for some, the status quo is fine with them, that is utterly insane. Time for a new game plan. It is the hard working American that created this country, not poltical interlopers nor those who live off the workers. As the Founder's prayed for, keep government influence to a bare minimum. "Obama Picks Up Phone on Economy ABC News ^ | 09/21/2008 ABC's Sunlen Miller reports: Since yesterday, Sen. Barack Obama has spoken on the phone with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Senate Banking Committee chairman Chris Dodd, Rep. Barney Frank, Sen. Chuck Schumer, Rep. Ralph Emmanuel, former President Bill Clinton and Sen. Hillary Clinton about the economic situation and the plan for dealing with it.(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.abcnews.com ..."

Henry Ruark September 21, 2008 4:35 pm (Pacific time)

WV: Strong evidence both actions and attitudes leading to current massive manipulations in r/estate, insurance, faux investments began long before 1999. That's date when then-Sen. Gramm manipulated death of Glass-Seagall Act, carried over from Great Depression and New Deal days of first crisis, with G-S set up for separating commercial and investment banks. F-Mae,F-Mac created due to the Great Depression experience; G-S resulted also from that. SO earlier crises were direct warnings of sub-prime mess, when G-S killed, for Enron interests, by Gramm, whose wife then joined Enron Board, collected $960,000 at least there. He still whining all the way to foreign bank for which he now high-voltage lobbyist. Congress was controlled by GOP from 1995 to 2006, which was why Gramm was able to slip knife into G-S. Clinton signed making him complicit, too. Current debacle direct result of same old greed, attitude toward risks with somebody else's money, et al, et al, longtime story of Wall Street. NEITHER party acted as oath for commonweal demanded; and as savings/loan and Keating Five scandal taught, too. McCain major player in K-Five doo-doo, rebuilt political life as "maverick", talked big game but accomplished naught. This one easy to see coming, even McCain did so in speech cited here; but nothing done despite multiple warnings. Greenspan had 12 yrs. without setting out rules demanded by law set up way back then. History happens, cannot be remade to fit political needs later no matter how hard it is pandered by political palaver.

WV September 21, 2008 1:34 pm (Pacific time)

If I was on a jury and was tasked to weigh the evidence on who was responsible for setting everything in motion that caused this financial catastrophe, I would look at how the economy was doing going back say 50 years , then when did it start to be used as a political playground for some incredibly irresponsible politicans? This is a real simple thing to assess, and that is when loans were being made to people who did not have good credit histories. Who suggested, even ordered to do this stupid thing? All Fannie and Freddie had to do was tell the housing market (banks, mort. brokers, even builders, etc.) that they would not be involved with subprime loans. It's as simple as that. This started during the Clinton Administration, the evidence is irrefutable. Now we need to ditch the bi-partisan posturing and develop some solutions. We do not want the goverment involved in the private sector. Socialism does not work, and that's where some want to take us. There has been greed going on, and a massive prosecution needs to be undertaken. Good firm sanctions is a method that may curtail this greedy behavior in the future. It did begin in earnest in 1999, that is clear.

Henry Ruark September 21, 2008 11:20 am (Pacific time)

R.M.: Just for you, from Robinson report just cited, here's kicker deep in story: "In other words, McCain is running against his own record. To cite one example, McCain backed landmark legislation in 1999 that removed the walls between banks, investment firms, and insurance companies. That bill allowed a company like AIG to expand beyond its traditional insurance business --which is still profitable-- into exotic new products that ultimately brought the company down." ------ IF you have any quarrel with that flat statement, identifying when-and-why this started, with death of Glass-Steagall as stated here, you should go to Robinson and the WPost. We find sources, check their credibility, see what they show, report to you. All for your nickel: Attention paid here to both reports and Op Eds. We can do differently and much more at S-N --but not at these nickel rates !!! IF you want professional consulting, with guaranteed benefits, LMA still in that business. Rates, client-list on request with ID.

Henry Ruark September 21, 2008 10:46 am (Pacific time)

To all: So let's stay with current comment on relevant issue of Bush-Cheney/Iraq War actions. Here's John Dean re Armey's recent "direct-lie" statement re Cheney: Vice President Dick Cheney's Incredible and Deadly Lie By Deceiving a Congressional Leader, Cheney Sent Us to War on False Pretenses and Violated the Separation of Powers - as Well as the Criminal Law (Information Clearing House) By John W. Dean This week, I agreed to deliver a "Constitution Day" talk on a college campus. My talk was not partisan. Yet the subject matter I selected was prompted by the most incredible - not to mention the most deadly - lie Dick Cheney has yet told, which was reported earlier this week. Last year, Washington Post reporter Barton Gellman and Jo Baker, now of the New York Times, did an extensive series for the Post on Cheney. Now, Gellman has done some more digging, and published the result in a book he released this week: Angler: The Cheney Vice Presidency. The book reveals a lie told to a high-ranking fellow Republican, and the difference that lie made. In this column, I'll explain how Cheney defied the separation of powers, and go back to the founding history to show why actions like his matter so profoundly. Cheney's Bold Face Lie To Congress (See source for rest;excerpt cut here purposely to send you to original content via link. Thus no persuasive-impact from me; use own mind to judge. Please note I thus did NOT insert mine own values.)

Henry Ruark September 21, 2008 10:32 am (Pacific time)

To all: Distortion-now cannot erase facts. Your insertion of purely personal assertions in content of NYT story is proof of intention-here. Citation of documentation from past does not allow you to insert shaping-shots now. IF you wish to analyze, then write Op Ed, cite statement, clearly state what's new. That way proves up both your intention and responsible, accountable approach. Despite yours:"The Clinton administration was behind this fiasco", what allowed subprime disaster was intentional death of Glass-Seagal Act, killed by Sen. Gramm et al, changing law to permit what you describe (with your added personal beliefs !) as reliable report then. Gramm debacle part of history setting up whatever reported then OR later, per numerous reliable, nonpartisan sources now. (On which Op Ed based.) Yrs re '99 NYT story flies in face of your own demand NOT to seek causes in past, written recently. You seem to want to select --even distort !-- what is firmly on public record, including time-span reflected. History also shows dereg as basic here, driven far, fast by Reagan et al, including Bush I, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Perle, Feith (sp ?) et al and beginning long before your own selected reference. That regime truly included Iran/Contra, "kill the union movement !", multiplied now-massive militarism, mounted covert support for corporate control in Americas, and deposed Iran elected govt. in coup at heart of current retaliations by "terrorists" ever since. (See previous S-N reports.) But surely, truly irrelevant NOW (except for party-politics pandering) when-or-who first stumbled, bumbled, bought-sold us into deepening doo-doo now, same Constitutional principle still holds: Clean-up, clean out, clarify, consolidate and RE-Constitutionalize. Your added data simply proves up that basic point, for me, and I believe for most others.

Henry Clay Ruark September 21, 2008 8:47 am (Pacific time)

To all: Major columnist lays it on re McCain as "clueless". "See with own eyes" since the writer sure-now to be attacked by neocon "kill dissenters !" gang: McCain is scarily clueless Eugene Robinson www.wpost.com; 9/21/08 WASHINGTON — John McCain was telling the truth when he said that economics wasn't his strong suit. In response to what many economists have called the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, the Republican nominee has sounded — and let's be honest here — totally, embarrassingly and dangerously clueless. His now-famous remark Monday about how "the fundamentals of our economy are strong" would almost by itself be enough to justify my assessment. But he committed what was probably an even worse gaffe Tuesday when, as the behemoth insurance company AIG teetered on the brink, McCain took a stand. "I do not believe that the American taxpayer should be on the hook for AIG," he said. "We cannot have the taxpayers bail out AIG or anybody else." Within hours, the federal government had bailed out AIG to the tune of $85 billion. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and others who know how Wall Street works understood that if AIG were to collapse, much of the financial system might follow. McCain quickly changed his tune, saying the government was "forced" to rescue AIG because of "failed regulation, reckless management and a casino culture on Wall Street." That sounds OK, but wait a minute. If he had any idea of what he was talking about — if he had any inkling of how big AIG is, or how central the company has become — then why on earth would he have taken a stand against a bailout in the first place? Doesn't he have economic advisers who could fill him in? Oh, I forgot. McCain's top economic guru, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, was busy explaining to reporters that McCain, as chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, "helped create" the BlackBerry." ----------- Revealing touch, that last re BBry,by McCain Economic Chief, rapidly denied when recognized as "clueless", too !! AIG had more than million acounts insuring rotting-paper held by clients. IF they blew, many foreign investors and state banks would refuse U.S. any further loans or credit. THAT's why AIG was "too big to fail !", but McCain did not understand reality when it bit us right in the ... But they did-it-to-themselves, and we ARE stupid if we allow them to continue to do-it-to us and our economy and democracy.

Rich Millison September 21, 2008 8:46 am (Pacific time)

To more fully understand how this current financial blunder got its roots see the below NY TIMES 1999 article. The smoking gun. The Clinton administration was behind this fiasco. THIS IS WHERE IT ALL BEGAN, THE BELOW IS BY NEW YORK TIMES, NOT SOME FAR RIGHT PUBLICATION! NYT 1999: Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending [to minorities and uncreditworthy] The New York Times ^ | 1999 | By STEVEN A. HOLMES In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders. The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets -- including the New York metropolitan region -- will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring. Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits(now proven to be fraudulent and Raines is paying back millions, should be in prison!). In July, the Department of Housing and Urban Development proposed that by the year 2001, 50 percent of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's portfolio be made up of loans to low and moderate-income borrowers. In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn. (Think skyrocketing energy costs!). Demographic information on these borrowers is sketchy. But at least one study indicates that 18 percent of the loans in the subprime market went to black borrowers, compared to 5 per cent of loans in the conventional loan market. "The change in policy also comes at the same time that HUD is investigating allegations of racial discrimination in the automated underwriting systems used by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to determine the credit-worthiness of credit applicants." Clinton/Cuomo advocated to sue the member banks if they do not comply..." (Keep in mind, Andrew Cuomo is now New York's Attorney General). The chickens have come home to roost. My below post provided a speech by McCain warning what would happen if oversight was not established.

Henry Ruark September 21, 2008 8:26 am (Pacific time)

To all: Here's "see with own eyes" summary of nation's leading Sunday editions. Please note all agree on horrendous size and impact of current debacle with LATimes demonstrating via page-wide $700 BILLION !: today's papers $700,000,000,000 By David Sessions Sunday, Sept.21,at 5:12 AM ET The Sunday editions of the Washington Post, New York Times, and Los Angeles Times all lead with the latest details on the Bush administration's plan to rescue the crippled U.S. economy--most of all yesterday's increase of the price to $700 billion, a figure higher than the current cost of the Iraq war. The LAT conveys the magnitude of the number by sprawling all 11 zeros across its front page Bush's plan would also give the Treasury department "unfettered authority" to buy failing properties, notes the NYT's lede, and raise the legal limit for U.S. national debt to a staggering $11.3 trillion. All three papers also front yesterday's deadly hotel bombing in Pakistan, one of the most catastrophic terrorist attacks in the nation's history. Speaking Saturday about his bailout plan, President Bush said "the risk of doing nothing far outweighs the risk of the package, and that, over time, we're going to get a lot of the money back." The WP reports that the proposal puts no time limit on how long the government may hold the assets it purchases, but that the goal is "to sell them after housing prices recover and to earn back much of the money." ----------- IF you believe that Bush-bit re "get the money back" then you believe in REprivatizating (as in FMae/FMac).See Comment above re that as next-step to come from same gang that took us where we are now, including new-faces if we remain so stupid --again ! Might do better to seek out new bridge sure to be built in Alaska, as great investment of restored fed/funds ~!~!. Please also note Krugman NYT column today has head: Government Now Seen as Solution" That'll work only if we clean out, clean up and CHANGE !

Henry Ruark September 20, 2008 8:27 pm (Pacific time)

R.M. et al: Yours appreciated; pls note that was when he was still "the maverick", not suddenly Bush sidekick even after knife in back last time McC. tried. Record still stands, dereg did allow debacle; was set up by Gramm;did occur under Clinton. Already stated both parties complicit. But nobody can deny Reagan origin of neocon cabal nor root of Iraq in PNAC. Too many of same gang signed that. So even if all as you say,McC. today turned Bush-copy,cannot now lead charge for change of GSE's even if that still even remotely possible, which it is not since too late, now must remain nationalized. Can you imagine rumpus if reprivatized without repayment of $700 billions already in chute !?! Re corruptions, lobbying, most other points, thank you for additional information, from which we learn deeper, earlier involvements which should for sure have triggered others in both parties to act despite the political pandering so highly evident. All must join with you in your obvious deep, intense, wise and honest dismay, disgust and dedication to change. Given allathat, seems you now have little choice but to join us in the inevitable change now so clearly demanded starting with clean-up, and clean-out, Constitutionally applied. SO how do you stand on impeachment: "Now, Later, or Never ?" --to coin phrase. Also, with such corrupt record on GOP-side,per your detailed recital how ever seek renewal of trust for them or any similar political associates, or allies, by any Americans, in the new Century ? Surely do invite your Op Ed for still further detail, with your solid intimate knowledge, in all sincerity. Me, I'm just old-head using my sources, jangling nerves, to learn by reactions of younger, perhaps wiser,deeper-involved, surely as intense, (!) via dialog and discussion. SO fire away on Op Ed, please, with even more insider/feel, sure to point to demanded change-now, with pox on both partisan houses sure-thing.

Henry Ruark September 20, 2008 2:07 pm (Pacific time)

R.M. et al: You want direct ref. to strong details re globalization and its draining damages to U.S. economy ? Here's "see with own eyes" reference to read, if you still do seek facts: War on Wealth: True Story on Globalization, OR Why the Flat World Is Broken: Gabor Steingart;McG-Hill;2008 ISBN 978-0-07-154506-9 Henry Kissinger, Strobe Talbot, John Kornblum,Robert Kutner, Jonathan Alter write fine reviews on jacket. If you do not recognize names, time you start reading-again ! I join them in praise for very readable book sure to produce cogitation, ready or NOT !

Rich Millison September 20, 2008 1:46 pm (Pacific time)

Please don't insult me by calling me a republican. One thing I believe in is that historical facts should not be muted by partisanship, and McCain did predict this mess and tried to do something about it, and his brief speech several years ago documents that assertion. Politically, the pertinent question is this: Which candidate foresaw the credit crisis and tried to do something about it? As it turns out, John McCain did — and partnered with three other Senate Republicans to reform the government’s involvement in lending three years ago, after an attempt by the Bush administration died in Congress two years earlier. McCain spoke forcefully on May 25, 2006, on behalf of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 (via Beltway Snark): Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae’s regulator reported that the company’s quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were “illusions deliberately and systematically created” by the company’s senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal. The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight’s report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae’s former chief executive officer, OFHEO’s report shows that over half of Mr. Raines’ compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac. The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator’s examination of the company’s accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform. For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac–known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs–and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO’s report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO’s report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay. 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. 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. In this speech, McCain managed to predict the entire collapse that has forced the government to eat Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, along with Bear Stearns and AIG. He hammers the falsification of financial records to benefit executives, including Franklin Raines and Jim Johnson, both of whom have worked as advisers to Barack Obama this year. McCain also noted the power of their lobbying efforts to forestall oversight over their business practices. He finishes with the warning that proved all too prescient over the past few days and weeks.

Enough! September 20, 2008 12:20 pm (Pacific time)

What a crock of bull you republican shirkers are trying to push. YOUR stupid choice for a president is responsible for all of our financial crisis and you well know it. Shut up and take your medicine.

Henry Ruark September 20, 2008 12:10 pm (Pacific time)

R.M.: Too late for political flackery, friend RM. Fact is neocons knocking hell out of economy ever since Reagan, now historically known and widely reported. Fact is dereg, privatization, globalization, corporate-set "free trade" losing U.S. the war for wealth worldwide. Fact is W. Consensus via IMF, WTO, et al, et al, now only ignored by developing nations, setting China, India, Malays, et al on path to productivity via pitiful-paid workers, to win war for wealth while we pander to political palaver. Send your stuff to those million households now already in foreclosure, and copy to 4000 family-mourners from Iraq preemption. Those are facts, too ! Re Raines, that's flatout lie denied in depth by WP, Raines, reporter, et al. So what do you seek ? Another eight years of supply-side sabotage, seduction of agency heads and fed/atty/leaders for dissent heard by Big Man ? Massive mischief multiplied in even more of financial system? Vet-care via hospital, mental and local aid slashed and corrupted ? Can go on; moretocome via Op Eds in rest of series. When do we see yours, with all full supporting details, more facts, and "see/w/o/e" links ? Meanwhile wallow in more wild whispers whipped up by lying McCain-ads designed to hide growing insights by thinking voters from facts available to guide wit, wisdom, will still there and operational.

Rich Millison September 20, 2008 10:32 am (Pacific time)

People like Rep. Charlie Rangel (he writes "tax laws", but ignores them), Rep. Barney Frank, Sen. Dodd, Sen. Dorgan, and many others of similar "proven inability" have been responsible for setting and overseeing congressional fiscal policy. How they doing? This is happening now in real time, we need not go back in time to evaluate their current performance. Couple them with a peerlessly inexperienced neophyte presidential candidate along with his fiscal advisors, former democratic appointed heads of Fannie May and Freddie Mac (Raines and Johnson, others) and what do we have? This is best described as a financial "poison stew" having been served to America. Also an Obama advisor (Johnson--above) headed his VP search committee. We know he picked Biden who for 2009 has requested approx. a 1/4 $billion in earmarks for his state of Delaware. I wonder if Biden's registered lobbyists sons had anything to do with that request? One should not be distracted with distant past references to why we are in this mess (except who appointed Fannie and Freddie heads), just look at the current congressional leadership. For example, what was the price of fuel (heating oil/gas) before the dems took over congress 2 years ago? Fortunately we are now seeing some leadership that is bypassing these incompetents in congress and we may just avoid a global depression. The choice to make this November is becoming quite clear, even to those wavering voters. To view proof that Sen. Obama was complicit with the misbehavior of Fannie/Freddie please see this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usvG-s_Ssb0 Seeing is believing in this case. Also neither tax increases (Obama) nor tax cuts (McCain) will even be on the table for years regardless of who wins in November. Talking down the economy is not a sign of good leadership. It's like yelling fire in a theatre, or starting rumors that would cause a run on banks (Think Sen. Schumer NY.).

Henry Ruark September 20, 2008 9:55 am (Pacific time)

To all: Apology: Small error. Story cited as lead in many dailies is NTTimes report, NOT AP, as I stated. AP report is even stronger and more detailed. Pay your nickel and take your choice --facts ARE facts, and millions must now begin to realize real choice here is simple, straightforward, and demanded for any return to our original Constitutional democracy. Clean-up, clear-out and punish perps is surely the first, most demanded step, the sooner the better.

Henry Ruark September 20, 2008 9:47 am (Pacific time)

To all: Good faith comments appreciated here but facts are still only honest political capital. That one re Fannie Mae chief tied to Obama campaign came from McCain ad. Here's WP story revealing distortion as it was developed: (excerpt from www.wpost.com) THE FACTS The McCain video attempts to link Obama to Franklin D. Raines, the former chief executive of the bankrupt mortgage giant, Fannie Mae. It then shows a photograph of an elderly female taxpayer who has supposedly been "stuck with the bill" as a result of the "extensive financial fraud" at Fannie Mae. The Obama campaign issued a statement by Raines on Thursday night insisting, "I am not an advisor to Barack Obama, nor have I provided his campaign with advice on housing or economic matters." Obama spokesman Bill Burton went a little further, saying in an e-mail that the campaign had "neither sought nor received" advice from Raines "on any matter." So what evidence does the McCain campaign have for the supposed Obama-Raines connection? It is pretty flimsy, but it is not made up completely out of whole cloth. McCain spokesman Brian Rogers points to three items in the Washington Post in July and August. It turns out that the three items (including an editorial) all rely on the same single conversation, between Raines and a Washington Post business reporter, Anita Huslin, who wrote a profile of the discredited Fannie Mae boss that appeared July 16. The profile reported that Raines, who retired from Fannie Mae four years ago, had "taken calls from Barack Obama's presidential campaign seeking his advice on mortgage and housing policy matters." --------- Any honest reporter would have called Raines first, before any story-tie to fictional event. McCain campaign desperation clearly exhibited here, now demanding attention from even biased msmedia.

Henry Ruark September 20, 2008 9:34 am (Pacific time)

To all: Remember professional assessment of polls for short-term value-only ? This "see with own eyes" will strenthen that for you: AlterNet Why the Polls Drive Us Crazy (and Shouldn't) By Joshua Holland, AlterNet Posted on September 20, 2008 http://www.alternet.org/story/99586/ There was a lot of talk last week about John McCain's "momentum" -- about the Republican brand rebounding. And a dark cloud of gloom descended over many of those hoping to bring an end to the Bush era. "We've seen this before," was a common sentiment. A reader recently sent me a story, written during the lead-up to the 2004 election, about Kerry's seemingly indomitable lead in the polls -- a lead similar to Barack Obama's 8-point (average) advantage in the horse race a few weeks ago. Then, this week, the storm clouds parted and the sun shone down on progressive America as Obama seemingly regained his mojo. Now he has surged back into the lead! This emotional roller coaster is bad for one's psychic health and entirely unwarranted. The bigger picture is this: For about 10 days during the past 10 months -- after Sarah Palin's introduction to the country but before Americans got a good look at her beliefs -- McCain inched ahead of Obama in the national head-to-heads. Now, the tide appears to be turning back in Obama's favor: As the electorate has gotten enough of a look at Palin to distrust her, her once-high approval numbers have taken a nosedive. And McCain continues to say brilliant things like the economy is fundamentally sound and he won't meet with the dastardly prime minister of Spain." -------- "Rest of story" points out deficiencies and how to learn what's really reflected.

Henry Ruark September 20, 2008 8:24 am (Pacific time)

To all: This NYT alert tells you all you need to know about how bad this situation has been allowed to get: Breaking News Alert The New York Times Saturday, 9/20/08 10:40 AM ET ----- Rescue Plan Seeks $700 Billion to Buy Bad Mortgages The Bush administration is asking Congress to let the government buy $700 billion in troubled mortgages, according to a draft of the plan. The proposal would raise the statutory limit on the national debt to $11.3 trillion from $10.6 trillion. Read More: http://www.nytimes.com/?emc=na --------- Earlier AP lead in many dailies state $500 billion, as largest program-ever for nation, despite huge impact on national debt, and threatening symptoms from foreign capital sources from whence dollars gotta come. SO check out Op Ed points for relevance. Ironic that "free-traders" peddling self-reliance and small government now have to rely on taxpayer privatization of profit and charitable impulses from foreign national banks and capital sources fed by savings-ratios in those nations. Never overlook contant war for wealth ongoing now via globalization, with many very complex factors forming the real risks. We losing that war steadily already to China, India, other developing nations who play by rules we cannot set, while we play political/palaver here instead of returning nation to productivity possible only by production rather than financial chess and galloping consumption.

Henry Ruark September 19, 2008 5:46 pm (Pacific time)

Percy: Thanks for your civil, factual, penetrating analysis. We learned from your sharing. We closer than might appear; sure you know Greenspan failed for 12 years with authority to do precisely what you recommend. Fact is threatening situation now worst since Depression is due to much deeper rot and ruck, more complex components than we now know --example: risk analysis on new forms of financial bundling. Given time and current direction we will surpass the Depression failures; yours re throat vs cancer right on the mark, with cancer now underway and count of rotting cells not today showing up. Also note MBA source; may appear pure but conflicts of interest are built in, right ? As with fed. no. these days, too... Thys yrs confirms, supports mine more than appears at once and we both agree dereg or failure to reg deeply at fault currently. Again,your participation with facts and source truly appreciated. What it means politically naturally open to further events and personal beliefs, feelings, values. Re Clinton complicity, fact is he left office with very large surplus, now fluttered away.

Henry Ruark September 19, 2008 7:09 pm (Pacific time)

R.M.: So let's go back to where it started, for McCain. That's the s-and-l bank debacle, costing taxpayers $51 billions (memory, not checked) and with notorious Keating Five, of whom McC. was surely one. IF he knows pattern so well, what did he do to stop it this time ? If you wish to check out ties to perps, see who of the 71 lobbyists on McCain campaign are tied to what dirt-digging. As before, both parties fully conplicit; which, again, now emphasizes we stop digging dirt and start digging deeply into change-demanded. With laws-upheld for all including imperial President and neocons in control for the last eight years, for sure. Whomever prior to that we can still get-and-hang, bring on the rope ! I'll gladly tie the knot, and help pull up the body for each one you can now bring to justice. But meanwhile let's start a brand-new game, with rules all out there for application to all --without waiting 12 years to write 'em, as Fed Reserve chief did this time. Your participation, too, most helpful,even if politicized; that's good dialog, for which thanks and best wishes. As always, Op Ed open for even more solid-stuff, factually founded, of course, with links to sources and files available too. Really "sincere";Comment small/box harder on you all while I glory in 1000-wd. shots. Editor set for anyone, anytime, with facts and civil approach.

Rich Millison September 19, 2008 6:17 pm (Pacific time)

It looks to me like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — the twin $1 trillion disasters — were the creation of congressional Democrats and a Democrat White House. So where are the Democrats? Why no news conferences explaining themselves? Barney Frank — who who insisted Fannie and Freddie had to buy loans made to the unqualified — has had nothing substantial to say, though he did wisecrack yesterday in a Hi-Ho Silver voice: The "loan arranger" is on the way. He was referring to the administration riding in to save him. Nancy Pelosi denied years of Democrat-sponsored easing of lending standards at Fannie and Freddie and simply said, no, not our fault. Harry Reid over in the Senate promised Democrat action and immediately adjourned Congress to get out of town right away. Bob Rubin, the Clinton economic genius who oversaw the launch of Fannie and Freddie drunken sailor's decade, stood with Obama today. He's the one who went from the White House to Citibank where he lost a billion dollars. John McCain is now running an ad pointing to Obama's link to Franklin Raines, the Clinton official who ran Fannie Mae and took a payday north of $50 million. Raines was reported by The Washington Post to be an Obama adviser on housing issues. But as soon as McCain's ad appeared, Obama rushed to deny Raines was any sort of adviser. Let's not forget Jamie Gorelick, Atty. Gen. Janet Reno's right hand who blocked different agencies from sharing intelligence was put on the Fannie Board by Clinton and bailed with a $26 million take. Just see who took all the money and you know whose behind this outrage.

Henry Ruark September 19, 2008 5:58 pm (Pacific time)

R.M.: Dereg was well under way from Reagan days, establishing attitudes at fault here. Sen. Gramm back-doored death of Glass-Seagall Act as final grease-job, with GOP control of Congress as weapon, and wife joining Enron Board; his "whiners" and "mental depression" words prove up point perfectly. Complicity of both parties now obvious, don't you agree ? Change demands departure of neocons who had eight years to fix this before it blew, and did nothing. We need complete reform only possible with complete clean-out, clean-up, and final punishment for perpetrators in both parties, in agencies, and in financial sectors. We MUST move beyond parisan political palaver and portioning out gullt; we all share in that, and wit, wisdom and will of all now demanded to return to Constitutional governance, via Founders' remedy for wracking attack. Your points worth sharing but more needed; Op Ed so declares and nothing here belies its major points.

Henry Clay Ruark September 19, 2008 2:23 pm (Pacific time)

To all: Apparently direct denial from Bush, Rumsfeld, Condo Rice and others, over past five years, has still not reached Sarah's ears yet. Here's "see with own eyes" reflecting her demonstrated lack of foreign policy data -OR, even worse, prevarication without even perverted "intel" to blame !: Sarah Palin Links Iraq to 9/11 By John Nichols, The Nation Posted on September 12, 2008, http://www.alternet.org/story/98616/ When everyone's attention was focusing on Alaska Governor Sarah Palin's less-than-reassuring interview about foreign policy with ABC News anchor Charlie Gibson, the Republican nominee for vice president was off delivering a speech in which she suggested a dramatically greater ignorance of recent history and international affairs than was on display in the interview. Speaking at Alaska's Fort Wainwright on Thursday, where she hailed the combat deployment of her son's Army unit to Iraq as a "righteous cause," Palin explicitly and repeatedly renewed the discredited claim that the invasion and occupation of Iraq was initiated as a necessary and credible response to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. "You'll be there to defend the innocent from the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the deaths of thousands of Americans," Palin told the departing soldiers. ---------- "Rest of story" details in depth, with dates and names, denial of this too-pat, now known to be perverted, propandized-myth, long ago forced to truthful denial by those the least likely to do so if not heavily-forced by fact.

Rich Millison September 19, 2008 12:44 pm (Pacific time)

Now we know why Obama wants to raise taxes - to bail out those jerks who tanked our mortgage markets and nearly sent us into a real depression. First off it is good to get a little history on what led to this mess: To find the incompetents, you need to go back to the Clinton administration, which decided that everybody and his kid brother was entitled to a mortgage even when they didn’t begin to qualify for a home loan. In saner days, banks designated certain areas as no-loan zones — depressed neighborhoods where lending money to potential home buyers was not just a risky investment, but a certain future foreclosure. Critics of the practice called it “redlining,” and President Clinton and his chums on Capitol Hill decided that banks should no longer act like banks and lend money only to home buyers who could afford to handle the monthly payments. Remember, Clinton left office with the economy a mess after the dot.com bubble burst too. This is what happens when you let inexperienced people with radical and naive ideas become president. One of the people key to this mess is Franklin Raines - who has ties to both Clinton and Obama. News is developing that will be of a nature that no one will be able to suppress the facts any longer.

Henry Ruark September 19, 2008 8:58 am (Pacific time)

To all: Largest taxpayer bailouts for financial interests in this nation's history now underway, firmly "socializing risk, while privatizing profit." Op Ed refers to "Fantastic Fortune". Phil Gramm killed Glass-Seagall Act separating commercial and investment banks, opening way for today's fiscal/financial/credit worse disaster in national record. His wife then became Director on Board of Enron --yes, that one !-- and was paid into the millions in ensuing years. Gramm is still McCain adviser on economics (!) despite his recent charge U.S. is "nation of whiners", with "mental recession" rather than real disaster. ----------- If you like those lemons, go buy some more... !! But don't expect to make lemonade, since the new ones will be rotten, too.

Percy Sanchez MBA September 19, 2008 8:56 am (Pacific time)

The Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) database, which allows rigorous apples-to-apples comparisons, only goes back to 1979. It shows that today's delinquency rate is only a little higher than the level seen in 1985. As to the foreclosure rate, it was setting records for the day -- the highest since the Great Depression, one supposes -- in 1999, at the peak of the Clinton-era prosperity that Obama celebrated in his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention late last month. I don't recall hearing any politicians complaining back then. Even if Obama is right that the foreclosure rate is the worst since the Great Depression, it's spurious to evoke memories of that great national calamity when talking about today -- it's akin to equating a sore throat with stomach cancer. According to the MBA, 6.4 percent of mortgages are delinquent to some extent, and 2.75 percent are in foreclosure. During the Great Depression, according to Wheelock's research, more than 50 percent of home loans were in default. Moreover, MBA data show that today's foreclosures are concentrated in that small fraction of U.S. homes financed by subprime mortgages. Such homes make up only 12 percent of all mortgages, yet account for 52 percent of foreclosures. This suggests that today's mortgage difficulties are probably a side effect of the otherwise happy fact that, over the past several years, millions of Americans of modest means have come to own their own homes for the first time. Providing a fair and consistent credit check before future loans and credit is extended will go a long ways in bringing our economic house back in order. Also I did not miss your point re: your hope to see Bush impeached. As far as having a relevant criminal investigation pursued, I would suggest those in congress who have financial oversight, namely Senator Dodd and Rep. Barney Frank. We need that investigation, and it's time to realize that bi-partisan cooperation is an absolute must to avoid this situation again.

Henry Ruark September 19, 2008 8:50 am (Pacific time)

To all: Op Ed is headlined "Lies, Distortions". Here's "see with own eyes" re now-notorious Spain-policy interview by McCain: Not a Gaffe? McCain Campaign Willing to Destroy Relationship with Europe to Conceal Confusion By Max Bergmann, Huffington Post Posted on September 19, 2008, http://www.alternet.org/story/99404/ Worse than Bush. There can be no doubt about it now. In McCain's bizarre interview with Spanish Owned Union Radio he refused to say whether he would meet with Spain's Prime Minister, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero. Listening to the interview repeatedly, it simply seemed that McCain had no idea who Zapatero actually was. McCain seemed to think he was a Latin American autocrat -- despite the reporter repeatedly saying "I am talking about Spain." This gaffe would seem to have very significant implications. Not knowing who the leader of Spain was or thinking Spain was in Latin America would not really be shocking coming from his running mate, but McCain has run on his foreign policy expertise and such confusion completely undercuts his credibility. Furthermore this gaffe would bring up real questions about his age. Is McCain really prepared to deal with a crisis at 3AM, when he can't even remember who the leader of Spain is during a late evening interview?" ---------- Check and evaluate with own mind; esp. action by F-Policy consultant Schuenemann, still getting paid by lobbyist firm dedicated to world's worst dictator accounts--and signer of PNAC proposal to attack Iraq preemptively.

Henry Ruark September 19, 2008 8:09 am (Pacific time)

To P. et al: Yours attempts to denigrate Obama for absolutely true state of nation statement. IF you do not recognize fact that this IS worst economic/credit debacle since REAL Depression, you are not mis-informed but intentionally distorting full-spectrum declaration by all media now involve, not msm-distorting. That includes both Bush-cabal and Congressional leader declarations, with joint action by Congress underway today to guarantee largest taxpayer-funding buyout for threatened financial institutions in nation's history. Yours re oll/results ephemeral at this disastrous juncture. Fact of neocon-policy disaster just now becoming deadly-clear to wit, wisdom, will of the American people...let it sink in a bit more. Here's Ron Paul today, on MSNBC, as "see with own eyes" re voter-reaction now on the way: Ron Paul on Why He Will Never Endorse McCain By Matt, Think Progress Printed on September 19, 2008 http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/http://www.thinkprogress.org//99400/ On MSNBC today, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) explained to host Norah O'Donnell that he refused former Sen. Phil Gramm's entreaties for him to endorse Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) because he disagrees with him "on all the major issues," especially foreign policy. "I mean I could never support somebody who thinks that it's funny to say 'bomb bomb bomb Iran,'" said Paul. "That, to me, is not somebody that I could endorse ever." ----------- Whether one agrees with Ron on some issues, there is no room whatsoever for disagreement on this simple moral issue.

Henry Clay Ruark September 18, 2008 7:05 pm (Pacific time)

To all: P's comments miss the point entirely re impeachment;but more seriously he's in deep error re nation's financial doo-doo, getting deeper every day. Here's latest from The NATION by Wm. Greider: The Scent of Fear AIG's Rotten Paper Could Bring the House Down September 17, 2008 For the first time in this unfolding financial crisis, I felt personally scared by the news. Not about my money, but about the potential for catastrophe. The Federal Reserve's lightning rescue of AIG has the smell of systemic fear. The house of global finance is on fire and everyone is running for the exits, no sure way to turn them around. What's next? The question itself is ominous, because there are no good answers. The US central bank and other nations acted with speed, and good that they did--an emergency loan of $85 billion to prop up the failing insurance giant, plus another $75 billion in liquidity pumped into the banking system to calm nervous bankers worldwide who abruptly stopped lending. The international rate for overnight lending among banks has doubled, an expression of fear that describes the potential danger of a sudden freeze in lending, more or less everywhere. That would deliver a deep shock to real economic activity, not just in the United States but worldwide. This feels ominously parallel to the financial chaos that followed the crash of 1929 and led to global economic collapse. Government is much better equipped this time with various safeguards to defend the system against an implosion--including Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke's personal willingness to act swiftly with unorthodox measures. But the case of AIG suggests the present unwinding has a malignant dynamic to it that might even overwhelm the authorities' capacity to put out fires. That's scary. I hope I'm wrong. The reason the Fed was compelled to save an American insurance company in order to save the global financial system goes to the source of the rot--the "new financial architecture" developed during the last generation. These innovations allowed banking and finance to expand their leverage explosively, borrowing and lending far beyond the traditional limits defined as prudent risk-taking." --------- SO "fact" remains "fact", and polls still retain same problems as always, which is why few are willing to bet future via their guidance.

Henry Ruark September 18, 2008 5:18 pm (Pacific time)

To all: Again we hear questionable statements in depth from non-ID'd source. Single-name welcome here but ID needed when Comment challenged as I do this one. Not worth effort to rebut each point, but offer own Op Ed to P.,to document for us via "see with own eyes" links. Simple ID to Editor will then facilitate yours, published when you make it available, for readers to evaluate with own mind --same "risk" I take every time, with every one of these...where's yours ?? Credibility depends --even in ordinary conversation--on your knowledge of source, even if it is your own mother,rapidly, instinctively recognized. This one ain't your mother, as per previous notes. Wise man stated: "Every one is entitled to own opinion --but not to own facts." He was in fact famed "conservative". SO, P., ID-self to Editor and we can continue direct. OR you can always present own Op Ed with sources supplied via "see with own eyes" links; AND your own facts, too !! Re facts, Internet full of srong rebuttal of yours; for readers, go "see with own eyes". Links later here with upcoming Op Eds. Re McCain, see series upcoming with "informed opinion" on each of main interest-areas for voters, as mentioned, and others. Re impeachment, point is its necessity for U.S. honor. Never too late, and no one expects rapid trial with election looming now, but that doth not alter necessity for essential action, sooner or later --which is point made here. P. carefully avoids stating stance on impeachment, please note; or any other action to wipe away stain on national honor now coloring every U.S. relationship across world.

Percy September 18, 2008 10:31 am (Pacific time)

Since congress is involved in the election season, and many of the contests are very close, the author of this article will not see an impeachment process happening. It boils down to that saying: "Bigger fish to fry." And as the below data shows, the public is more concerned about economic issues, and energy availability is a dominant theme. By substantial margins, voters believe that McCain’s top priority is finding new sources of energy while Obama is more focused on reducing the amount of energy we consume (even though are demand is going up). Data released yesterday (www.rasmussen.com) shows that voters overwhelmingly believe it is more important to find new sources of energy. Sixty-seven percent (67%) believe McCain shares this priority while just 29% believe Obama holds that same view. I imagine Obama will change his viewpoint, but since he has changed on so many issues, it will be very transparent as to his motivation for any future change on his part.

Percy September 18, 2008 7:53 am (Pacific time)

It appears that an impeachment proceeding against Bush has about as much chance of happening as getting the msm to start reporting facts by correcting the "spin" of both presidential candidates. For example Obama states that this is the worst stock market crash since the 1929 depression. Since the start of 2008 the market is down approximately 5%. In October 1987 the market dropped 22.8%, or around 4 times more--big difference. Also Obama recently stated that our savings rate is at an all time low. Currently our savings rate is 2.6% and during the last quarter of the Clinton Administration it was 1.9%. The msm has failed to provide a comprehensive analysis, which would include which party filibustered oversight bills. Follow the money when it comes to political donations. Sen. Dodd was number one, guess who was number 2 (and had only been in the senate a very short time) and who was way down on that donation amount list?

-----------------------------------------------------------UPDATE-------------------------------------------------------------

Editor: The individual submitting this comment seemed familiar, so I checked the log on his/her IP and discovered that he or she has used a number of different names in recent months in an apparent effort to make it appear that his/her points, generally racist and intolerant in nature, are supported. This is the list of names:

Dylan Duke, JB Stallworth, Deb Myerson, War Veteran, Rich Millison, WV, Percy, Delaware, Del, Carlson, Real Democrat, Retired Military, Sourced, LH, Going Broke, Len Hannoford, Oregon Veteran, Telford, Humos, Eternal Optimist, Scazry Times, Capitalist, Ronan, Brian, Wonder, Steve, Gomer, Casse, Ben Jammin', Jason Burbach, Kevin, JB, Kilroy, Carol Ann, Sgt. Rock, Abdul Farqua, Wally, Change, Micro/Macro, Booker T Washington, Stewart, Kyle, Pragmatic, Teacher Veteran, ex-government employee, Ayers Weatherman, Fido, Real Combat Vet, Mary Stennis, Proud Schwab Investor, Bullfrog, Hopefully, Update, Fed Up

I almost feel like I should apologize for this going on so long, and now those of us who spend time around here know that the number of people who voice extreme positions regarding right wing politics on Salem-News.com are not as strong in number as they appear. This individual who uses male and female names to launch frequently ridiculous attacks on myself, Henry Ruark, Professor Stephen Zunes, Dr. Phillip Leveque, etc., is nothing more than a disturbed poser who writes comments, then writes back to herself or himself, representing several people instead of just one. I would write off anything ever posted here under those names, or by anyone who resembles the ramblings left by this individual.

Tim King

[Return to Top]