US Politics - 51 threads to the election!

[DanteGabriel]

Speaking of fraud, it seems that the facts coming out about Newt Gingrich's ties to Freddie Mac are getting worse by the day.

First off, his “historian” role seemed to be more than a bit of a stretch. Freddie Mac acknowledged that his contract did not include lobbying work, but officials told Bloomberg he had been hired as a consultant specifically to convince Republicans who wanted to dismantle the mortgage giant to back off. Nobody had any memory of him warning about impending financial doom either. Meanwhile, lobbying watchdogs pointed out that his “consultant” title was commonly used by ex-politicians to avoid having to register as lobbyists while performing highly similar functions.

As more details emerged about his ties to Freddie Mac, Gingrich’s campaign became less witty and defiant in its descriptions of his work. Gingrich told The Huffington Post on Tuesday that he “offered strategic advice over a period of time” for Freddie Mac but couldn’t remember when or what he told them about the subprime mortgage crisis that would trigger a worldwide financial collapse in 2008.

Early the next day Bloomberg broke the news that Gingrich’s ties to Freddie Mac were far, far, more extensive and lucrative than anyone had known. Over a period of eight years ending in 2008 Gingrich had collected between $1.6 million and $1.8 million.

Worse, while there was little record of Gingrich publicly warning about an incoming mortgage crisis, Gingrich had plenty to say in late 2008 about other politicians who accepted political donations or consulting fees from Freddie Mac. First, he called for a Congressional investigation into lawmakers who had accepted their contributions. Later, he demanded that Democrats return any money they had received from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in light of the subprime mortgage disaster. He offered unsolicited advice to Republican presidential nominee John McCain urging him to attack President Obama over his Freddie Mac donations.

http://2012.talkingp...ign.php?ref=fpa

Tough times for this month's featured Non-Romney-Running-for-President.

It's as if somehow people are remembering that Newt Gingrich is actually an unlikable, treacherous, arrogant, sociopathic, relentlessly hypocritical serial liar. Who, by the way, has done more damage to the "institution of marriage" than any gay person ever.

But hey, FLoW said he's good at working across the aisle (apparently at least when there's money in it for him), so he's got that going for him.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Ants,

They have a duty to know. If they can't then they need to work to make the business manageable or sell their shares and the consequent responsiblity. Limited liablity is the sheild corporations use to screw all of us. It should be severely curtailed.

[The Iceman of the North]

Actually, there used to be these things called "lynchings", and "tar and feathering" which substituted for government when a community/the victims found a particularly bad fraudster.

Yes, but the good fraudsters, which are the real problem, can afford to apy for their own protection.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

DG,

Newt Ginrich is a slimbag.

[DanteGabriel]

DG,

Newt Ginrich is a slimbag.

But he's a slimebag who can work across the aisle!

By the way, Rick Santorum thinks he is the next new hotness, once Newt finishes his book tour wraps up his campaign and retreats back into his Fortress of Newtitude.

"These things come in four week increments," Santorum told The Huffington Post. "Newt is finishing up week one. Herman [Cain] had about a month. [Rick] Perry had about a month. Michele [bachmann] had about a month. The timing may be just about right for us."

It sounds delusional just from looking at the polls, where Santorum remains stuck at around two percent, to think that he could become the hot candidate. But if anybody is positioning himself to be the last candidate standing in the race to provide conservatives an alternative to frontrunner Mitt Romney, it is in fact Santorum, the 53-year old father of seven.

If Gingrich wilts under the pressure of a full public vetting of his past, Santorum may be the beneficiary. He has traveled to all 99 counties in Iowa and is continuing to move around the state at a breakneck pace. He also recently landed an experienced Iowa hand by the name of Chuck Laudner to coordinate his efforts in the Hawkeye State.

http://www.huffingto...ml?ref=politics

I can't wait to see Santorum have his moment in the sun in December. What a merry Christmas that will be for the comedians at least.

[Horza]

But he's a slimebag who can work across the aisle!

By the way, Rick Santorum thinks he is the next new hotness, once Newt finishes his book tour wraps up his campaign and retreats back into his Fortress of Newtitude.

http://www.huffingto...ml?ref=politics

I can't wait to see Santorum have his moment in the sun in December. What a merry Christmas that will be for the comedians at least.

What a fool! Doesn't he realise if he has December then Huntsmania will grip voters - just in time for Iowa?!

[TrackerNeil]

That would constitute fraud, and that's where the government gets involved.

Not necessarily, no. My understanding is that lenders managed to persuade regulators that CDO buyers did not have to maintain the same capital reserves as the original lending entities, which means that no law was broken. The ratings agencies were not suborned through threats of force but rather through the application of business pressure; namely, if TrackerNeil Ratings Inc. ever wanted to work with Lehman Brothers again, it would think carefully about rating their loans badly. That's wasn't illegal either.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

60 Minutes did a story about it Sunday.

http://www.cbsnews.c...o;videoMetaInfo

They also did a story on tasers, which was also interesting.

Coincidence? Perhaps not...

[Fez]

But he's a slimebag who can work across the aisle!

By the way, Rick Santorum thinks he is the next new hotness, once Newt finishes his book tour wraps up his campaign and retreats back into his Fortress of Newtitude.

http://www.huffingto...ml?ref=politics

I can't wait to see Santorum have his moment in the sun in December. What a merry Christmas that will be for the comedians at least.

That's one of the only things I've ever seen Santorum say that actually makes some sense. I'm not saying it'll happen, but I wouldn't be too surprised if he did get a surge too eventually. And I wish he would get the nomination, the dude is so batshit insane and in favor of things that almost no one is (like banning condoms) that 2012 would be the blowout of all blowouts.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

The second example is around risks. If you believe the business leaders knew the risks they were taken you are out of your mind.

I'm going to disagree with at least part of that. There are always risks, and in that market, people knew that the risks were larger. They just figured they could beat that risk, and it would be some other sucker getting caught short. It was like musical chairs, you could write as many shitty mortgages as you wanted, and as long as you could sell them off quickly enough, you had no liability.

In a very real sense, there was a huge gambling element to it.

To pretend they were going "sure a cost of making this money is we might collapse - but its ok we'll get a bail out" is naive.

I agree with that except to the extent you're talking about the GSE's, because in that case, talk of the risk/value of the implied guarantee had been widespread for a decade or so.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

DG,

Newt Ginrich is a slimbag.

That is certainly true with respect to his personal life. The question is whether or not that should be relevant to his fitness for office.

Personally, I think it is relevant, but not necessarily dispositive. And presumably, all those people who defended Clinton on the grounds of it being about his "personal life", while ignoring the whole lawsuit/under oath component, wouldn't have a problem with Newt's personal life period.

[Fez]

That is certainly true with respect to his personal life. The question is whether or not that should be relevant to his fitness for office.

Personally, I think it is relevant, but not necessarily dispositive. And presumably, all those people who defended Clinton on the grounds of it being about his "personal life", while ignoring the whole lawsuit/under oath component, wouldn't have a problem with Newt's personal life period.

I don't care about his personal life. I don't care about any politician's personal life unless a crime is committed. I do care about hypocrisy, which he is guilty of, but not enough to note vote for him. What matters to me is his policy stances and how terrible I think they are; and that's all anyone opposed to Newt should care about.

[awesome possum]

FLoW is right. Gingrich's personal life doesn't matter.

Good thing he's just as much of a scumbag politically as he is personally.

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

Oddly enough, it looks like the new front runner of the day is Ron Paul, who is polling second in Iowa (behind Cain, by a single point) and in New Hampshire (behind Romney, by about 5 points).

[Just a peasant]

We have had a lot of political commercials since Boston tv gets New Hampshire viewers and the Huntsman ads have been on the rampage. It ends with "Why haven't we heard of him?"

[TrackerNeil]

I think a candidate's personal life is relevant in a race only to the extent that it tells us something about how he/she would govern. For example, I don't much care that Larry Craig cruises dudes in airport restrooms - although it was fun to hear about it - but that combined with his anti-gay voting record told me he was a cruel, screwed-up individual with no real sense of perspective. That's not the kind of guy you want holding high office.

Regarding Gingrich, I don't much care that he's a womanizing jerk who thinks - for no real reason - that he's smarter than others. However, the way he inveighed against Clinton's indiscretions while happily indulging in his own tells me he's opportunistic and utterly devoted to his own ambition. Not my president, thanks.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Here's a good one:

http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/1111/biden_hidin_e42e6930-e288-47d8-9a86-b6a3cca55b8a.html

Spot the irony in Vice President Biden’s schedule today, from the White House’s daily guidance:

“At 1:00 PM, the Vice President will attend a meeting of the Government Accountability and Transparency Board in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building. At 2:30 PM, the Vice President will meet with representatives of the National Sheriffs' Association in the Roosevelt Room. These meetings are closed press.”

(It was only two months ago that State Department officials briefed reporters on transparency efforts but refused to have their names be printed; and in March, the White House postponed a pooled-press ceremony for President Obama to get an openness award -- it was later rescheduled and carried out in an undisclosed meeting.)

[Anya, Vengeance Demon]

I think Newt Gingrich is a perfect example of why nobody really cares about a politician's personal life. The people most likely to get outraged by his behavior are also the least likely to vote for any Republican. The people who have happily gotten outraged by Anthony Weiner will find a way to argue that Newt Gingrich's personal life is not really that important, particularly compared to his many years of service in other areas blah blah blah. And of course this will switch when it's a Democrat again.

And I'm not really sure why it should matter, outside of extreme circumstances. (JFK's decision to sleep with the mistress of a notorious mob boss is substantially more problematic than anything done by Gingrich or Clinton.) Newt Gingrich may not be a very nice guy, but he can have a dozen more wives without affecting our lives to any degree.

Not that it matters, because Newt Gingrich is not going to be the next President, any more than Herman Cain or Ron Paul.

[Paladin of Ice]

For all the people who so adamantly say that raising taxes on millionaires would be the worst thing to happen evar, apparently there are a few dozen millionaires at least who would beg to differ.

Link

Two dozen wealthy members of the group Patriotic Millionaires for Fiscal Strength are targeting members of the deficit "supercommittee" to increase their taxes.

Entrepreneur and producer Charlie Fink, said he and other Patriotic Millionaires testified in a congressional hearing and visited the offices of 13 members of Congress on Wednesday, seven of whom are members of the supercommittee, to express their concern for the country's fiscal health.

Fink, who lives in Washington, D.C., said if the Bush tax cuts do not expire, the country "is digging itself a big hole by foregoing revenue."

"Without revenue, we will never solve the problem by giving tax cuts to the wealthy while supporting two foreign wars," Fink, a former AOL executive, said.

While thinking about that, let me ask you what would do more for your wallet and fiscal health; getting a job that gives you a 50% raise over your current salary, (i.e going from a $40K salary to a 60K salary) or eating out at the diner one less time per week?

[awesome possum]

The right is just so completely full of it with that spiel and everyone but them knows it.

That's why you see hacks like swordfish trying to move the goalposts to say, "well taxing millionaires won't solve all the problems," as if anyone suggested they would.

Solve some of the problems? I don't see how such a boost in revenue couldn't. And I don't see how anyone who doesn't have their head firmly planted in their own ass couldn't as well.