Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire "Would the Last Honest Reporter Please Turn On the Lights?" A MUST READ!

Since the author of the article is *so* interested in journalistic honesty, I'm surprised that he didn't bring up these associated facts.

http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2008/09/9663_mccain_fannie_freddie.html


But McCain's own campaign staffers are those special interests, a fact that casts doubt on both McCain's hiring judgment and his ability to pursue tough reforms of Fannie and Freddie.

Aquiles Suarez, listed as an economic adviser to the McCain campaign in a July 2007 McCain press release, was formerly the director of government and industry relations for Fannie Mae. The Senate Lobbying Database says Suarez oversaw the lending giant's $47,510,000 lobbying campaign from 2003 to 2006.

And other current McCain campaign staffers were the lobbyists receiving shares of that money. According to the Senate Lobbying Database, the lobbying firm of Charlie Black, one of McCain's top aides, made at least $820,000 working for Freddie Mac from 1999 to 2004. The McCain campaign's vice-chair Wayne Berman and its congressional liaison John Green made $1.14 million working on behalf of Fannie Mae for lobbying firm Ogilvy Government Relations. Green made an additional $180,000 from Freddie Mac. Arther B. Culvahouse Jr., the VP vetter who helped John McCain select Sarah Palin, earned $80,000 from Fannie Mae in 2003 and 2004, while working for lobbying and law firm O'Melveny & Myers LLP. In addition, Politico reports that at least 20 McCain fundraisers have lobbied for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, pocketing at least $12.3 million over the last nine years.

For years McCain campaign manager Rick Davis was head of the Homeownership Alliance, a lobbying association that included Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, real estate agents, homebuilders, and non-profits. According to Politico, the organization opposed congressional attempts at regulation of Fannie and Freddie, along the lines of what John McCain is currently proposing. In his capacity of president of the group, Davis went on record in 2003 and insisted that no further reform of the lenders was necessary, in contradiction to his current boss's sentiments. "[Fannie and Freddie] are subject to an innovative and stringent risk-based capital stress test," Davis wrote. "The toughest in the financial services industry."

and this,....

http://www.newsweek.com/id/160561

Since 2006, the federally sponsored mortgage giant Freddie Mac has paid at least $345,000 to the lobbying and consulting firm of John McCain's campaign manager, Rick Davis, according to two sources familiar with the arrangement.

Freddie Mac had previously paid an advocacy group run by Davis, called the Homeownership Alliance, $30,000 a month until the end of 2005, when that group was dissolved. That relationship was the subject of a New York Times story Monday, which drew angry denunciations from the McCain campaign. McCain and his aides have vehemently objected to suggestions that Davis has ties to Freddie Mac�an especially sensitive issue given that the Republican presidential candidate has blamed "the lobbyists, politicians and bureaucrats" for the mortgage crisis that recently prompted the Bush administration to take over both Freddie Mac and its companion, Fannie Mae, and put them under federal conservatorship.

But neither the Times story�nor the McCain campaign�revealed that Davis's lobbying firm, Davis Manafort, based in Washington, D.C., continued to receive $15,000 a month from Freddie Mac until last month�long after the Homeownership Alliance had been terminated. The two sources, who requested anonymity discussing sensitive information, told NEWSWEEK that Davis himself approached Freddie Mac in 2006 and asked for a new consulting arrangement that would allow his firm to continue to be paid. The arrangement was approved by Hollis McLoughlin, Freddie Mac's senior vice president for external relations, because "he [Davis] was John McCain's campaign manager and it was felt you couldn't say no," said one of the sources.

More light on "the fairness doctrine " which if God forbid ever came to pass would become one of the biggest oxymorons of all times.... this stuff matters.

http://patriotroom.com/?p=3256


Obama�s Censorship Czar
� by Bill Dupray in: 1st Amendment, Barack Obama, Communists, Corruption, Freedom, Media
This is the ugliest, darkest aspect of an Obama win - government suppression of free speech. It is Stalinist - pure and simple. All despots couch their language in the terms of fairness and doing what is right. Gullible liberals buy it because that is the core of their world view, which, of course, has nothing to do with freedom. For American patriots, freedom and fairness are one in the same. For Liberals, Socialists, and Communists, freedom and fairness are mutually exclusive.

Here is the face of Big Brother telling you what is fair, and what is not fair, for you to listen to on your radio.


Keep in mind that the Fairness Doctrine, by it�s very nature, is anti-capitalist, government controlled media. Senator [bleep]-for-Brains flat out says that it doesn�t matter if there is no market for liberal talk radio, stations should be required to carry liberal hosts, because they will add the government�s approved message. There should be no such thing in the United States as a government-approved message, but that is what they believe and want to do.

Barack Obama and Democrats in Congress have decided that the public has had too much of the most popular radio talk show host in American history, Rush Limbaugh, for the sole reason that he opposes their politics and wins elections for Republicans. Their plan is to mandate more liberals on his stations, otherwise he will be taken off the air. This is despite the fact that the liberal Air America has failed spectacularly due to a lack of interest.

To prove the point, ask yourself what conservative hosts and stories will be required on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, PBS, or NPR under the Fairness Doctrine. None. Liberals already believe these �news� organizations are fair. Not satisfied with that monopoly, however, they aim to kill off the rest of the competition.

For those who cannot see this kind of government speech control as a descent into despotism, just wait. You will.

By and larger, it's a good article with very valid points. It's a bit ironic that he's blaming the journalism industry with not reporting what really happened, when he himself seems to only know half of the story. There were 4 distinct incidents that lead to this crisis. Two were created by Democrats and two were created by Republicans:

Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000
Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act -1999
Community Reinvestment Act � 1995 (deregulation of GSE�s)
Lowering credit standards for mortgages -1999