U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line
(D) Michael Bennet

(D) Phil Weiser

60%↑

50%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Jena Griswold

60%↑

40%↑

Sec. of State See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez

(D) J. Danielson

(R) Sheri Davis
50%

40%

30%
State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(D) Jeff Bridges

(R) Kevin Grantham

40%

40%

30%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Manny Rutinel

(D) Yadira Caraveo

45%↓

40%↑

30%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
March 20, 2009 03:41 PM UTC

Open Line Friday!

  • 69 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“Make no mistake, these are Obama bonuses.”

–Rush Limbaugh

Tweet
Share

Comments

69 thoughts on “Open Line Friday!”

  1. You look at how they are handling the banks, AIG, etc and I think Paul Krugman nailed it – they figure the idiots that created this mess are the ones to fix it. What they appear to be doing is pouring immense amounts of money into a broken system.

      1. It’s time to return to the policies of the Clinton administration and leave those future-mortgaging Reagan and Bush followers in the dustbin of history. I’m glad you’ve seen the light, KK.

        2. In his last six years, with a GOP Congress led by John Kasich drafting budgets, spending growth slowed.  It’s one of the few times in post-WWII era that we’ve had a fairly responsible fiscal policy.  

          Someone please stop the spending madness.  Please!  Did you see the latest CBO estimates (this is on the Washington Post website):

          Federal Deficit Soars Past Previous Estimates

          Deteriorating economic conditions will cause the federal deficit to soar past $1.8 trillion this year and leave the nation wallowing in a sea of red ink far deeper than the White House had previously estimated.

          I would hope that this is something everyone can agree on.  

          1. It’s also income. I think you understand that.  That’s why the Bush Taxcuts For The Rich (And A Pizza for Joe) have been disastrous.  Like Reagan, Bush was a Don’t Tax and Spend Like Democrats Allegedly Do.

            Far better a trillion for roads and schools than bombs.  The former is an investment, the latter is an expense.

            BTW, federal spending has been around 18% of GDP since forever.  The notable exceptions are during WWII and some of the Clinton years.  Sumbitch, best years ever in America with increased taxes! Square pegs in round holes to you guys who have one mantra.  

        3. I am sure this link is to some radical right wing Richard Mellon backed site, but here it is … http://www.frontpagemag.com/Ar…

          ….few Americans understand that for many years Fannie and Freddie have been, first and foremost, tools of Democratic politicians, funders of the Democratic Party, and, in the words of a former Fannie CEO, the intimate “friends” and “family” of the Democratic Party’s left wing.

          Nor are most Americans aware that Fannie and Freddie, through their eponymous grant-making foundations, have funneled literally hundreds of millions of dollars in recent years to a host of leftist groups and causes that work to promote Democratic agendas, causes, and policies. To set the record straight, it is worthwhile to examine the connections between Fannie, Freddie, and the Democratic Party.

          A full account of the recent financial collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac must consider the role of the Clinton administration. As early as 1993, Clinton’s first year in office, Housing and Urban Development Secretary Henry Cisneros and Attorney General Janet Reno expressed dismay over reports that the rejection rate of black mortgage applicants nationwide was considerably higher than that of their white counterparts. In response, Reno warned that thenceforth “no bank” would be “immune” to an aggressive Justice Department campaign to punish such “discrimination” in the lending market. For emphasis, then-Assistant Attorney General Deval Patrick pledged to work for the elimination of all racial disparities in mortgage lending rejection rates.



          A careful look at the facts revealed, however, that those disparities were not actually due to discrimination of any kind. Instead, they reflected the realities of borrowers’ credit-worthiness, as determined by such objective factors as credit history, debt burden, income, net worth, age, and education.

          Wait for it, there is more …

          Leading the charge, Barack Obama not only blames Republicans, but tacitly blames capitalism as a whole, referencing it by the pejorative code name of “trickle-down” economics. Yet, Obama makes no mention of the fact that the Bush administration exhorted Congress for years to set up an agency to regulate lending institutions like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Nor does he mention that John McCain demanded similar oversight, only to be rebuffed by Democrats like House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank, who continued to favor the issuance of the subprime loans that have now caused the mortgage market to collapse.

          Since the 1990s, indeed, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have been in the Democratic Party’s hip pocket. From 1991 to 1998, for example, Fannie Mae was headed by James Johnson, a longtime aide to former Democratic vice president Walter Mondale. While dutifully following the Clinton administration’s aforementioned mandate, and thereby helping to run the mortgage lender into the ground, Johnson himself earned tens of millions of dollars in his Fannie Mae post, including $21 million in 1998 alone. Johnson made headlines this past summer when Barack Obama tapped him to chair his vice presidential selection committee. Johnson had to resign in disgrace from that position when it was revealed that he had taken at least five below-market real estate loans totaling more than $7 million from Countrywide Financial Corporation.

          Johnson’s successor as Fannie Mae’s head, Franklin Raines, had previously served as a budget director to President Bill Clinton. During his years at Fannie’s helm between 1999 and 2005, Raines, while continuing the ill-advised policies that ultimately would bankrupt the company, pocketed nearly $100 million in compensation before leaving under a cloud of scandal. It seems that Raines had manipulated profit-and-loss reports so as to enable himself and other senior executives to earn enormous bonuses on top of already-high salaries – in 2003 alone, Raines received $16.8 million in cash compensation – even as the financial empire he oversaw was imploding.

          Another Fannie Mae luminary was Jamie Gorelick, who served as vice chair of the mortgage lender from 1998 to 2003. Prior to that, she had been Janet Reno’s Deputy Attorney General [and Michael Bennet boss] during precisely those years when the Clinton Justice Department was aggressively compelling banks to make subprime loans to unworthy borrowers. That experience gave Gorelick valuable training for her future post at Fannie Mae, where she ultimately would increase her personal net worth by $26 million.

          While the foregoing Democrats collected obscene sums of cash as reward for their complicity in the subprime mortgage debacle, by no means were they the only beneficiaries of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac money. Between 1989 and 2008, no fewer than 354 members of Congress received funds from Fannie and Freddie. Of those, 209 were Democrats who pulled in a combined $4.84 million. The leading recipient of Fannie/Freddie money was Connecticut Democrat Chris Dodd, the Banking Committee Chairman who collected more than $165,000. Dodd opposed oversight of Fannie and Freddie and pushed hard for the continuance of subprime mortgage loans. In second place was Barack Obama, who, in just three years in the U.S. Senate, raked in $126,000. Third was Massachusetts Democrat John Kerry, with $111,000.

          Republicans, too, deserve a measure of criticism. Some 143 of them received Fanny and Freddie funds totaling just under $3.02 million. Utah Republican Robert Bennett, a Senate veteran, led the GOP with $107,999 in total contributions from the mortgage giants. Two independents also took in over $28 thousand.

          And I hate to go here, but there is more so stand back because this fuel will be claimed to be only racially motivated …

          Such ties represent merely the tip of the iceberg. To gain a fuller appreciation for just how closely the mortgage companies were allied with the Democratic Party and its surrogates, one might look at the grant-making arms of Fannie and Freddie – specifically, the Fannie Mae Foundation and the Freddie Mac Foundation. The former was established in 1968, the latter in 1991. Together, they hold combined assets exceeding $285 million, and each year they give tens of millions of dollars (nearly $89 million in 2006 alone) in grants to predominantly leftwing organizations that promote a host of pro-Democrat agendas. Among the groups supported by Fannie and Freddie are the American Civil Liberties Union; the NAACP and the National Urban League; left-wing financier the Tides Foundation; pro-illegal immigration groups like the Mexican American Legal Defense & Education Fund, the National Immigration Forum, and the National Council of La Raza; pro-Democratic community activist groups like the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the Center for Community Change, and the Alliance for Justice; feminist organizations like National Organization for Women and the National Women’s Law Center; and former president Jimmy Carter’s Carter Center. A comprehensive list of liberal, leftist, and pro-Democratic Fannie and Freddie grantees would fill an entire book.

          So there you have it … as President Obama said last night, 40% of the economy has been driven by faux financial services that invested heavily in Corporate Social Responsibility, Lobbyists and Political donations; with President Obama only second to Dodd in reciepts of hard political cash from the creators of the mortgage meltdown.

            1. Let me summarize:

              Mortgage giants are “friends” and “family” of the Democratic Party’s left wing.

              “no bank” would be “immune” to an aggressive Clinton DoJ campaign to punish “discrimination” in the lending market, regardless of the inability to qualify.

              Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have been in the Democratic Party’s hip pocket. James Johnson, a longtime aide to former Democratic vice president Walter Mondale.  Johnson himself earned tens of millions of dollars in his Fannie Mae post, including $21 million in 1998 alone. Johnson had to resign from the Obama administration in disgrace when it was revealed that he had taken at least five below-market real estate loans totaling more than $7 million from Countrywide Financial Corporation.

              CEO Raines pocketed nearly $100 million in compensation before leaving under a cloud of scandal. It seems that Raines had manipulated profit-and-loss reports so as to enable himself and other senior executives to earn enormous bonuses on top of already-high salaries – in 2003 alone, Raines received $16.8 million in cash compensation – even as the financial empire he oversaw was imploding.

              Jamie Gorelick, who served as vice chair of the mortgage lender from 1998 to 2003. Prior to that, she had been Janet Reno’s Deputy Attorney General [and Michael Bennet boss] during precisely those years when the Clinton Justice Department was aggressively compelling banks to make subprime loans to unworthy borrowers. That experience gave Gorelick valuable training for her future post at Fannie Mae, where she ultimately would increase her personal net worth by $26 million.

              So there you have it … as President Obama said last night, 40% of the economy has been driven by faux financial services that invested heavily in Corporate Social Responsibility, Lobbyists and Political donations; with President Obama only second to Dodd in reciepts of hard political cash from the creators of the mortgage meltdown.

              1. You know, although I don’t think you do, a claim of “being in the Democrat’s hip pocket” needs definition and proof.  I know, I know, that’s hard work.

                Conveniently left out is the policy of the Bush misadministration to increase home ownership among minorities.  They were as guilty as anyone.  

                We discussed this blame game ad nauseum last fall.  If you can’t offer something new, GO AWAY!

                1. I’ve noticed that’s been a fairly common put-down on ColoradoPols. One need only run a Search (right hand side of the screen) on “douche” in the “Comments” section (“by date” is always best) to see how often it’s been bandied about.

                  Not that I’m disagreeing with you, mind you.  

  2. Court blocks rule allowing guns in national parks

    WASHINGTON (AP) – A federal judge has blocked a federal rule allowing people to carry concealed, loaded guns in national parks and wildlife refuges.

    “A decision issued Thursday by U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly overturns a rule issued in the waning days of the Bush administration.

    “The rule took effect Jan. 11 and allowed visitors to carry a loaded gun into a park or wildlife refuge as long as the person has a permit for a concealed weapon and the state where the park or refuge is located allows concealed firearms.

    “Previously, guns in parks had been severely restricted.

    “The Obama administration had said it was reviewing the Bush rule but had defended it in court.”

    Oh, damn – Gundamentalists have been busy hooting and screaming about how Obama is taking their guns, and 44 sends his lawyers to defend the policy of packing heat in RMNP.

    And loses.

    Now I don’t have to worry about packing my kevlar vest and helmet the next time I go hiking up to Cub Lake.

    (BTW – Judge’s Bio here – http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/ko… I guess if the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court thinks she’s ok, I’m gonna guess she’s not in the “Judicial Activist” category.)

    1. I guess if the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court thinks she’s ok, I’m gonna guess she’s not in the “Judicial Activist” category.

      Doesn’t matter.  As soon as you make a ruling that opposes the rightwingnutters you are, by definition, an ‘activist judge’ and ‘legislating from the bench.’

      Only by toeing the nutter line is a judge fair and impartial.

      1. It’s ridiculous to support a ban politically, never mind legally.  It has no bearing on public safety and frankly is unconstitutional.  This is an issue for the states, not the feds and I commend Obama for supporting it.  Now if he can get his AG to STFU.  

        You all need to get over your mindless fear of guns and just respect the constitution that you profess to love.

          1. Were not what I was arguing.  There’s a big difference in what is and what should be and I was just simply making the “what should be” point.

            States should administer to all CCW laws, not the feds (that is as long as the state in question is following USSC rulings and the 2nd Am).  The issue in this case should not be who owns the land, if that were the case then all BLM and USFS land should be considered.  The previous law simply made no sense whatsoever.  Leave the arbitrary political boundary of a National Park and state statute applies, but inside it’s federal?  

            Sounds arbitrary and capricious to me.        

            1. But National Parks aren’t the same as BLM or USNF land. They have boundaries like states, and are not simply held by the government like those latter cases. People from all over come to visit national parks; no one goes to visit a national forest, just an attraction in that forest.

              The Bush admin, as usual, violated the separation of powers in this instance. Want a concealed gun in a national park? Write your congress(wo)man.

      2. “Previously, guns in parks were severely restricted.  The restrictions were adopted by the Reagan administration in the early 1980s.”

        Put this together with the fact that the highest marginal tax rate under Reagan was 50%, much higher than the Clinton rate that Obama wants to return to, and I guess Conservative St. Reagan was really a 2nd amendment hating, anti-freedom, rich soaking, income redistributing socialist.

        Who knew?  Of course he was a Hollywood guy.

              2. From their website:

                “Screen Actors Guild is the nation’s largest labor union representing working actors. Established in 1933, SAG has a rich history in the American labor movement, from standing up to studios to break long-term engagement contracts in the 1940s to fighting for artists’ rights amid the digital revolution sweeping the entertainment industry in the 21st century.”

                http://www.sag.org/about-us/mi…

                1. … none of whom work for scale*. That’s what all the minor supporting actors do, and like other unions that might seem superfluous today (like the player’s unions in big league sports), SAG came about because management exploited these unknowns.

                  *There are exceptions. Lots of well known actors worked for scale on Robert Altman movies.

    2. .

      Folks who solo up Blanca Peak mid-Winter,

      or go dead-reckoning bushwhacking in wilderness areas (GPS & CDMA are for sissies) will still need to protect themselves.  

      .

    1. After what they’ve done, how can anyone say what that guy said with a straight face? These guys who screwed the rest of us should be in freaking handcuffs right now, and that guy has the audacity to suggest that they know how to run the financial system still?

      Good grief.

    1. and certainly don’t take it lightly, but the flame in the bathroom sink is quite possibly the coolest thing I’ve ever seen.

      A little dramatic for bath time though.

  6. The Statement:

    “I bowled a 129,” he told Leno.

    “That’s very good, Mr. President,” Leno said sarcastically.

    But then came the foot-in-mouth moment: “It’s like the Special Olympics or something,” the president said.

    The Obama Apology:

    TBD



    The Whitehouse released apology for Obama:

    On the return trip to Washington last night, deputy press secretary Bill Burton told reporters that the remark “was in no way intended to disparage the Special Olympics. He thinks that the Special Olympics are a wonderful program that gives an opportunity to shine to people with disabilities from around the world.”

    2. To wait eagerly for those you hate to make the slightest and most insignificant slip so that you can try, impotently, to exploit it for far more than it will ever be worth?

      If only we all had such noble aspirations….

      2. .

        folks might get the impression (wrongly) that you are talking about Josh Penry’s efforts to protect the Colorado economy.

        And the big deal being made over 57% vs 62%.

        .

        1. offense to somebody, and yet all human beings make minor slips of the tongue. If you want to try to score some cheap rhetorical and political points by inflating the significance of a comment that was clearly devoid of ill-will, that’s your privilege. But it says far more about you, and what you want to contribute to the human enterprise, than about anyone else. It’s a parasitic and petty approach, the recourse of the weak and foolish to the most convenient and readily available weapons, to fight those who have more class, intelligence, and good will than they can ever imagine having.

          But go for it. What else do you have going for you? I’m sure Obama wouldn’t begrudge you this infantile and moronic pleasure.

        2. offense to somebody, and yet all human beings make minor slips of the tongue. If you want to try to score some cheap rhetorical and political points by inflating the significance of a comment that was clearly devoid of ill-will, that’s your privilege. But it says far more about you, and what you want to contribute to the human enterprise, than about anyone else. It’s a parasitic and petty approach, the recourse of the weak and foolish to the most convenient and readily available weapons, to fight those who have more class, intelligence, and good will than they can ever imagine having.

          But go for it. What else do you have going for you? I’m sure Obama wouldn’t begrudge you this infantile and moronic pleasure.

          1. you posted it twice!

            And really, “parasitic and petty”?  I help people find energy sources.  You’re apparently a law student.  Good for you.  We need more lawyers, I’m sure.

            1. who finds parasitic (yes, really, “parasitic”) and petty (yes, really, “petty”) opportunities to exploit minor slip-ups for some kind of perverse personal gratification or cheap political “point-scoring.”

              You’re right, of course: Your superficial knowledge of me is as dispositive as the depth of your insights into other matters. I’ve been a teacher (college and high school), a novelist, a care-giver in a nursing home, a day care worker and camp counseler, an outreach worker (preventing HIV infection among injection drug users), a crisis intervention hotline volunteer, and am in law school for the sole purpose of doing low paying public interest law. But, hey, good call.

              1. I guess it might be my mother’s work for more than 40 years teaching children with physical and developmental disabilities and advocating on their behalf that lead me to be sensitive to the casual way that Obama dismissed the people who compete in the Special Olympics.  I never said the man was a monster.  I said that he said something stupid and insensitive, and that it is not insignificant.

                1. This is, to such a high degree, precisely the kind of thing that partisan ideologues exploit reflexively, and to our collective detriment, that I just assumed that that was the case here. I am as quick to criticize it when Democrats and progressives do it as when Republicans and conservatives do, I find it so counterproductive and distasteful. But, if you were really responding out of a particular sensitivity to this particular topic, that’s a different story. I still consider it a completely excusable and inoffensive slip, one that even people of absolutely good will are perfectly capable of making. But I was responding more to the motivation I imputed to you than to the fact that you had the temerity to disagree with my assessment. I apologize.

  7. He, in essence said that he bowls like the folks in the SE.  So?  Should we pretend that the participants in the SE bowl 200?  I imagine there are some who think so.

    If it was disparaging to anyone it was only Obama himself.

    1. that it was a political incorrect reference to those who participate in the special olympics, depicting them as people who are not atheletically endowed, rather than as people who are atheletically endowed despite, and within the context of, the challenges that life has thrown their way.

      And it’s total bullshit. A perfect person who foresees all interpretations of all statements, parsing his words with infallible precision second-by-second, without permitting the slightest spontaneity to creep into his thoroughly sterilized utternaces, would never have made such a slip.

      But any human being, even the most sensitive and articulate, might have.

      And I’m really, really glad that we have a brilliant human being, rather than either a flawless automoton or, as we had just prior to this one, an incompetent (if possibly somewhat lovable) boob, for president.

      1. Pass the smelling salts.

        Heck, I’m sure there are men and women in the SE that could whip my fat ass, so if I say that’s my standard what’s the deal?

        Bless ’em all.  I was working with handicapped men and women back in the 70’s when the SE was getting going.  I can still picture the grins on the Down’s Syndrome “kids” for their accomplishments.  God bless Ethel Kennedy.  

      2. He wasn’t comparing himself to a Special Olympics participant.  He was mocking Jay Leno’s praise of his mediocre bowling score as being similar to (alleged) over-praising of Special Olympics participants.

        In other words, Obama was implying that the accomplishments of Special Olympians are often praised beyond their merit.

        Sure it’s a slip.  But like most slips, it’s revealing.

          1. I told Pols to cancel my account and remove my posts months ago.  The didn’t even acknowledge my request.  So, here I am, fishing around for people to snap at some bait.

            As for good will, I don’t give any politicians my good will.  None.  Obama had it for a while, but that is only because Bush was so obviously cretinous and evil.  I will give Obama credit for being less evil.

            1. You don’t think they might have better things to do than to delete your account? I would have thought you’d have better things to do than post snark out of spite.

              I usually appreciate your comments when they’re constructive Greg. I hope if you continue to post, you’ll at least drop the ‘tude.

              1. I wasn’t the one in my discussions with Steve who introduced words like “petty”, “parasitic”, and “moronic”.

                As for the deletion, I specifically told Pols that, as I could find no TOS/TOU on this website, I assume that I still own the copyright to anything I’ve posted.  I specifically revoked my license to them to continue publishing my past writings.  Perhaps I need to send a letter, rather than an email.  But, I assume that a simple command of “delete user” would take care of the issue.  I wasn’t going to post the request publicly, as the whole reason for asking to be deleted was that I don’t really care to be associated with political discussions anymore.

                1. I usually find the best way to get in touch with them is by posting here, so you might have actually done yourself one better.

                  Enjoy the rest of your weekend.

                2. “the whole reason for asking to be deleted was that I don’t really care to be associated with political discussions anymore.”

                  Hallelujah.

                  It’s really remarkably easy not to post if you don’t want to post. Really. Easy.

    2. He’s offering to give Obama some pointers. It was a stupid way for Obama to poke fun at himself and he realized it right away, called the head of Special Olympics to apologize before the taped show even aired and his apology was very well received.   Fair for right to enjoy this (I certainly enjoy every foot-in-mouth moment by righties) but it’s going to fade fast. For one thing Senator Grassley’s suicide and tit sucking comments in connection with AIG took up some of the air time that could have been devoted to Obama’s gaffe.  

  8. at Michelle Obama’s vegetable garden restaurant.

    Someone actually called this “khymer Rouge” ish!

    I think it sets exactly the right tone for this decadent society that lives on credit and wouldn’t appreciate a radish from a rutabaga.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Gabe Evans
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

84 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!

Colorado Pols