Topic: Election 2008
Hey McCain: Reign In Your Campaign! McCain and Palin are being hammered by the media over Palin's actual record in Alaska. It's time they actually start telling the truth, and quit repeating the same sound-bites that are now biting them in the butt.by Natalie Schultz
(libertarian)
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Your bridge is crumbling fast! You'd better get with it. First, defend Palin's record (Everyone knows McCain's). Next, go on the offense: Tell the people what they want to hear! Tell the TRUTH!
Fact: Palin canned the "Bridge to Nowhere." Problem: During her campaign for Governor she said she would not stop it because the Alaskan congressional members worked so hard to get the money, and she wanted to help grow the economy of that small town by "Not standing in the way of progress." Truth: The congress-people did their jobs, Palin defended them and her state, but in the end she learned it was a national mockery, so as governor she cancelled the bridge.
Just ADMIT the TRUTH!
As for the private jet, Palin DID "Put it on Ebay." BUT, it did not sell, so she sold it through a broker. However, Mr. McCain: She did NOT make a profit! It sold at a $600,000 loss! But, cutting your losses is often the best financial act. I'm sure that the insurance and jet-fuel costs would have gone well above the loss she took on the jet itself. She saved taxpayers that burden. It was a mostly symbolic gesture because it was her corrupt and wasteful predecessor who bought it, so ultimately she was just getting the monkey off Alaska's back.
FACT: Obama voted WITH Bush on the most important issue of the day: Energy. Obama voted for the Bush / Cheney Energy Plan that gave more subsidies to oil companies. McCain voted against it, and Sarah Palin actually increased taxes on oil companies so that Alaskans would get the most benefit from their land. Palin understands cost-benefit analysis, and she knew the that oil companies were well able to afford to pay more to the owners of the land (Alaskans), but she also knew that she had to allow the free-market to do its job. She did not raise the taxes so high that the oil companies walked away; under her governorship both the oil companies and the residents of Alaska benefited. Sarah Palin used Alaska's resources as leverage to benefit Alaskans. Oil companies wanted to build a natural gas pipeline so they can increase their profits, Alaskans wanted the natural gas pipeline so they have more jobs, and Sarah Palin ousted the corrupt politicians who were in the pockets of the oil companies, then cut through the red tape to get the pipeline going in exchange for more revenues from the oil companies going into state coffers. Under Sarah Palin's leadership everyone won oil companies, Alaskans, and eventually the rest of the country who will get more domestic oil and natural gas. Under the Obama-Bush plan only oil companies benefited, and the taxpayers were left holding the bill.
As for getting earmarks as Mayor: Giuliani faced the same criticism during the primaries. His argument was valid: As a mayor your job is to get the most for your constituents as possible, and both Palin and Giuliani worked within the current system to do that. They did their jobs. Obama, on the other hand, as Illinois State Senator, gave $14 Million in earmarks to Tony Rezco (now a convicted felon), in exchange for a multi-million dollar mansion in an elite area of Chicago. What is better? A mayor getting money for her constituents, or a senator giving taxpayer money away just so he can live in a mansion? Obama seems more like the corrupt "Good Ole boys" that Palin ousted, than the face of change.
The problem here is the SYSTEM, not Palin. The system is CORRUPT because of WASHINGTON! Washington needs to change, NOT America!
Obama wants to change America; McCain wants to change Washington.
Obama blames the Constitution and the People who abide by it. He thinks they are bitter. McCain blames Washington, because he has been there long enough to know it is broken. Obama wants to take away our Rights and let the government control our lives, McCain wants to get rid of the Washington insiders who have been destroying our Rights at our expense. And Palin upholds the Constitution everyday of her life, both in Government and in her personal life; she demonstrates that by not allowing her personal beliefs to influence her governing.
***
Sunday night Steve Forbes was on CNBC Squawk Box Asia, and he was the only person to point out that the falling Dollar is the cause of all of our financial problems. Some guy in Washington was arguing that the housing crisis caused the dollar to fall this year, and Forbes, rightly, corrected him and said that the Dollar has been falling since 2004 and it is the weak dollar that has caused ALL of our other financial problems, including the housing crisis.
Monday night, NJ Governor Corzine was on Mad Money, and even he admitted that the Freddy and Fannie Mac disaster is way too complex and confusing to understand, that NONE of the presidential candidates should be expected to understand it, try to explain it, or try to solve it themselves. This is UNKNOWN territory! The fact is the government had no choice but to takeover Freddy and Fannie, because if it did not, our entire economy would have immediately collapsed. However, foreign investors, as Corzine properly noted, most likely did put pressure on the US government to step in before the Macs totally imploded.
Herein lies the problem: The United States is OWNED by FOREIGN COUNTRIES!
Why? Because as the dollar fell in relation to other currencies, American companies, especially banks, became CHEAP investments. This is simple: Back in the 1990's the Dollar was strong, so when I went abroad I was able to travel cheaply and buy lots of stuff with my dollars exchanged for Deutsch Marks, Italian Lire etc. However, the last time I was in Germany, 2003, it was not so cheap to exchange my dollars for Euros, but my dollar still bought a lot of stuff with my Polish Zloty; now, even that is no longer the case. Heck, even Iceland cost me a fortune back in 2005, and I haven't traveled abroad since.
The upside of all this? All the foreign tourists who are flocking here to go shopping because their currency buys twice as much today as it did 5-10 years ago.
The downside? Our ENEMIES are TAKING OVER all of our companies! When tourists shop abroad they buy souvenirs; when countries invest in other countries, they are TAKING OVER! We're not taking about British, French and German investors here. We are talking about actual NATIONS, like China, Dubai, and Russia who now OWN large stakes in many of our most important companies. These are not individual foreign investors; they are actual foreign GOVERNMENTS! This is a VERY BAD thing!
So, is it likely that countries like China, who own large stakes in Freddie and Fanny Mac, put pressure on our government to bail them out so that the value of their Preferred Shares would not crash? Yes. What is the upside for Americans? That the housing crisis, hopefully, will bottom out and over the next couple of years we will be back on track. And, hopefully, millions of American home mortgages will be saved.
So, what should become of Freddy and Fannie Mac? Should they become private or should they become wholly government entities. This is a toughie. I, personally, am against the government interfering in the free-market. The Mac crisis PROVES that their wish-washy quasi-private government-controlled standing is a TOTAL DISASTER. My own theory is that for now they should become government agencies, since going private just means that foreign countries will gobble them right up, if they don't just go under completely. HOWEVER, they can only become government agencies if NO more FOREIGNERS can invest in them, and NO special interests can have any sway on them. They should be treated like FEMA, as an emergency back-up plan for American homeowners, not as profit-driven companies restricted by the government. It must be either-or, not both.
The American government has only one job: To PROTECT AMERICANS! NOT foreign investors. So, yeah, American homeowners may be the ultimate recipients of this takeover, but there is NO WAY to know that that is actually WHY our government reacted. Heck, for all we know China or Russia threatened to nuke us. More likely, they threatened to dump their shares, in which case the mortgage market would have totally evaporated. In 1999 the pathetically low interest rates led us into a recession because all the investors who bought on margin were called on it and they tried to sell off their shares to cover what they owed, and then the stock market plummeted, forcing more rate cuts. The Fed screwed up. Royally. Now the Fed is in a pickle; it can't raise rates to beef up the Dollar and reduce inflation, but it also cannot lower rates because the Dollar would crash and inflation would skyrocket. The Federal Reserve is proof that the government should not interfere in the private market. More specifically, it highlights the conflict of interest that is inherent in government entities who are influenced by and influence the private market.
The American government cannot prevent China or Dubai from bailing out private banks such as Citibank, but it MUST prevent foreign countries from owning American mortgages. Think about it: When an American gets a mortgage from a bank do you think they actually want that mortgage sold to someone else who will then sell it to an enemy nation? Do you actually think the average American would have gone to a foreign bank to get a mortgage in the first place? NO!
The American People have BEEN HAD! It's high-time Washington starts doing its job representing the interests of Americans, not their own self-interests.
***
So, Mr. McCain: You said that you will hold out your hand to any willing member of Congress to get things done, to "shake up" Washington. I have a very simple request: Send a peace offering to the only member of Congress who actually understands economics, has written six books on the subject, and knows more about currency issues and the falling Dollar than anyone else in the country. Mr. McCain, I beseech you: Pay a visit to Dr. No! You say that you are willing to work to fix Washington and help the American People, even if you have to work with people you do not like. Well, I know someone else who feels the same way. So, I ask you to put your differences aside and focus on the most important issue of the day: The ECONOMY.
Mr. McCain: Talk to Ron Paul! (Rhymes with Tear Down This Wall!)
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 2 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of Natalie Schultz only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Natalie Schultz is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
You need to do some fact checking. First start with Tony Rezko. There is no evidence of any wrongdoing on Obama's part. Even if there had been wrongdoing, it would not be an earmark.
The issue is not that Palin took earmarks, the issue is lying about it. She cancelled the bridge after it was highly criticized, but used the money to build a road to the nonexistent bridge to nowhere.
Obama has never claimed that he hasn't taken earmarks. There are only about two members of Congress that have not taken earmarks and John McCain is not one of them. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) is one, can't remember the other one.
False McCain Statement:
"I have never asked for nor received a single earmark or pork barrel project for my state."
John McCain on Sunday, January 6th, 2008 in a debate
Scary, Palin does not even know that Freddy and Fannie Mac was not a federal agency.
McCain still thinks former Senator Phil Gramm is the smartest economist that ever existed.
All the complaining about the liberal media is a farce, the media have been giving McCain a free pass on his nonstop lies. It is about time for the media to learn about journalistic standards.
Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2008-09-09 06:01:18
"Some guy in Washington was arguing that the housing crisis caused the dollar to fall this year, and Forbes, rightly, corrected him and said that the Dollar has been falling since 2004 and it is the weak dollar that has caused ALL of our other financial problems, including the housing crisis."
First of all, Forbes is wrong about the date. The dollar has been falling since 2002, not 2004. See this link for a chart. Second, and more accurately than what Forbes said, the housing crisis was caused by a housing bubble that began forming in the late 1990s due to Federal Reserve stimuluses, which also caused the dollar to decline. Since the Federal Reserve controls the dollar (particularly the number of dollars in circulation), and since the Fed's exhuberance in creating money out of thin air caused both the tech bubble and the real estate bubble, it is marginally accurate to say that the housing crisis happened because of the falling dollar, but it is far more accurate to say that the Fed caused the real estate bubble, the tech bubble, and the falling dollar.
Those who claim that the housing crisis is way too difficult for presidential candidates to understand don't want us to learn that it's actually pretty easy to understand. The Federal Reserve is a legal counterfeiter. They're at fault, and they did what they did for the same reason they always do what they do: to make their banker friends rich, just as they have always done since 1913 when the Fed was created. In case you hadn't noticed, the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and the members of the boards of the 12 district banks of the Fed are dominated by bankers. Any presidential candidate who doesn't understand that fact, including McCain, is not fit to serve in office.
So blaming the housing crisis on the price of the dollar is misleading. The fault lies with the people and the system who control the dollar.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
