O'reilly dead on for McCain campaign

McCain is losing on the economy because he is afraid to slam Bush. Don't slam Bush, slam the financial meltdown and take a stand. O'bama and the media already admit that revenues are going to drop and that a recession is imminent. Their traditional answer of raising taxes to get "more revenue" is disastrous. And though cutting taxes in 2003 ended a recesssion and increased revenues, cutting anything but capital gains is suicide at this point.

Let's agree to all make the sacrifice and hold spending at the current levels during this down turn. In a few years revenues will be back up and we can decide if we need to increase the size of any government programs at all. Since many of us will not notice the difference, maybe we will spend it more wisely.

O'reilly hit it right on the head in his talking points (timestamp 1:00) for 9/29.

Advice from a supporter that is beginning to wane

I want the maverick back. Not the guy that talks about being a maverick and being bipartisan and bringing people together but the guy that IS. Don’t suspend your campaign and don’t phone it in.

Continue stumping for the fact that you tried. You went there to try making sure that all parties were at the table. And in the end this bill was better and had more bipartisan support than the original ever could have. But that it is not enough and it is not done. Stump for the Gingrich turned Republican house plan. Some smaller “bail-out” might needed to be included, say 100B to allow for the Fed to hold distressed mortgages. Take the failure of a bad plan as a good thing not a distraction. Everyone, I talked to leaning either way thinks that an insurance plan and protection is in order but not a buy-out. If you can be the voice of this plan, the voice of those Republicans and Democrats that could not vote for this, the voice of the people. Then get to Washington (middle of the night, early morning arrival) and get his financial bill done. Stand as a leader from the Capital steps and proclaim your stance strongly for all to hear. It will pass and you will bring me strongly back into your camp.

You have to believe it, you have to feel it, and you have to lead I see this campaign much as I did the acceptance speech; kind of slow and methodical, laying out the differences, explaining positions to the American people. But it needs to end strong, the speech ended with emotion, it ended by calling us all forward, it ended as a maverick and America become the leader we all need. loved it. Now end this campaign the same way.

700 billion...Do you believe in cooincedence?

The Clinton and Bush plans to increase minority home ownership may have been noble but...

Oct 15, 2002: ...Fannie Mae responded by committing $700 billion in home financing to 4.6 million minority households through 2009. This increases by 66 percent the specific pledge Fannie Mae made in 2000 to minority families through it's American Dream Commitment plan to provide $420 billion for three million minority families...

Interesting number in light of the bailout. Do you believe in coincidence?

Decent history of the housing crisis and the impact of CRA

Re: Community Reinvestment Act from Wikipedia.

Scary words if you are bank president…

The CRA mandates that each banking institution be evaluated to determine if it has met the credit needs of its entire community.

…regulations for the CRA were strengthened by focusing the financial regulators' attention on institutions' performance in helping to meet community credit needs.

Almost comical now, if it was not so scary.

Representative Barney Frank (D-MA) claimed of the thrifts "These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis, the more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."

So the basics are thus… The government decided we need more home ownership in the poorer communities. They focused their attention on those banks. To avoid detection banks gave loans they knew had a likely high default rate. Then they were let off the hook by selling those loans to Fannie and Freddie which were protected from default as GSE's by the tax-payers.

And here we are with a Socialized Mortgage market. Now think about this history and these arguments when you hear about the right to Healthcare for the poorer communities.

Who is working for us and who is lining their pockets?

Let's let the congressional record speak for itself.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/record.xpd?id=109-s20060525-16&bill=s109-190
Note the “Reform act of 2005”. Comment dated May 25, 2006.The most significant statement… 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.

Someone had their finger on the pulse of this issue and was trying to address it and save the disaster we are trying to fix today. Someone was looking cause and effect, actions and impacts. Someone was completely in touch with the situation and trying to do what was right. That someone was four republicans including John McCain.

Contrast that with this.
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/update-fannie-mae-and-freddie.html
Note the dates 1989-2008. Obama was elected in 2004 and has reached number 2. I guess he is an “up and comer” [in lining his own pockets]. Note that McCain is not in the top 25. Wonder why?

So the simple question is, "Who is working ofr us and who is working for themselves?" It would seem to be so obvious at this point that to change Washington we need someone that is willing to for us.

Electricity comes from...thin air...and oil!

It would seem that the Democrats believe that electricity comes from thin air. They continue to pick winners and losers in this energy crisis. They have obviously decided that oil and natural gas, stagnant in the ground, is the loser and electricity and food for energy is the winner.
I simply do not understand it. Oil sits in the ground. Trillions of barrels of it already discovered and recoverable, but we do not want to get at it. I understand we do not want to use it all but even the amounts we have already found will last us 50+ years.

So instead we are to change over to electric cars. Electricity generated predominantly by lovely, clean burning COAL. Can't generate it via nuclear, too dangerous; Solar, too inefficient; Hyrdo, too destructive to those fish. Well if those are out of reasch we can always generate electricity by burning heating oil.

But we can also go after that other green technology, FOOD. So we do not burn oil buried in the ground, used for nothing else, but we burn food. We take fertile soil, clean water, farm equipment [what does that run on?], trucks, trains and processing plants to turn food into a liquid that we can burn. Yeah that makes sense.

Then we wonder why the price of food goes up and why the poorest of the poor go hungry. The term "you reep what you sew" has never been more literal [or did I mean to say liberal].

60% dependant on foreign oil is not acceptable.

We do not need to "lessen our dependence on foreign oil" we need to "eliminate" our dependence on foreign oil. These dribs and drabs of 5% here and 3% there are useless and only serve to distract from the problem. Politicians want you to believe that they are doing something. Moving from 70% dependent to 60% dependent is progress but of little long term value.

I have learned enough from politicians and business to know that when setting goals you should always aim high. You may not succeed but you are guaranteed to do better than if you set lower goals. I expect that the 10% goal of our current politicians will end up being 5% and deemed a huge success. I say aim higher. Aim for 100% US production. Yeah we may not get there but we will get far closer then hoping for a few percentage points here and there.

Drill off Florida, Texas and California. Drill in that postage stamp inside ANWAR and get moving on that shale from the Rocky Mountains. Increase Nuclear, Wind and Hydro power. Pursue new technologies. None of these alone will make up the 70% short-fall. T. Boone Picken's plan aims for 20% wind power. OK, that helps and we still have 50% to go. If we all inflate our tires as Obama would suggest that can get us 3-5% more. Still leaving 45% that has to come from somewhere.

When you set the proper goal it is easier to see that none of these are the right answer, all of them are. Let's get moving.