• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2nd Pres. Debate 2008 Thread (DOW dropping, Biden is off to Home Depot)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Hitokage

Setec Astronomer
AniHawk said:
To think some of us have been following this since a year ago this time and longer. I personally didn't get in until the Iowa victory speech, and I didn't get that interested until after New Hampshire.

It's been a long, long campaign. Feels good to have it finally winding down. Glad the Angels lost so I can just focus my time on school, work, and the election.
I remember when Obama first appeared on my radar in early 2004, and it's been a pleasure seeing him go from Illinois candidate for US Senate with a funny name and a strong local following to knockout keynote speaker to book touring author to primary candidate to party candidate. Myself and many others have have thought, "Why isn't this guy running instead of Kerry?" after the convention speech, but it was during his book tour that I really started hearing people ask him to run for President.

Also, I remember Obama being the most asked for guest during the 2006 campaign.
 

AniHawk

Member
On a side note, my mom read something from The New York Times (supposedly) that said Obama is a "staunch supporter of abortion." I asked her again if that's what it said and she said it was. She's VERY pro-life, about as much as Palin is (so she says), although she's a registered Democrat and definitely wont vote Republican this cycle. So this has left her conflicted.

Is there an article that says this? I did a google search and all that "staunch supporter of abortion" + Obama showed up on were what seemed like anti-Obama and right-wing websites. It seems like a very slanted way of wording things.
 

Clevinger

Member
AniHawk said:
On a side note, my mom read something from The New York Times (supposedly) that said Obama is a "staunch supporter of abortion." I asked her again if that's what it said and she said it was. She's VERY pro-life, about as much as Palin is (so she says), although she's a registered Democrat and definitely wont vote Republican this cycle. So this has left her conflicted.

Is there an article that says this? I did a google search and all that "staunch supporter of abortion" + Obama showed up on were what seemed like anti-Obama and right-wing websites. It seems like a very slanted way of wording things.

There's the infanticide smear. Go to fight the smears for info on it.

Besides that, I don't see how he'd be a "staunch supporter" any more than any pro-choice candidate. But if she's as pro-life as Palin, I doubt that'd be acceptable.
 

Hitokage

Setec Astronomer
Obama is pro-choice, but he's all about ways to reduce abortions short of banning them outright, which is actually a more productive path from a pro-life standpoint because abortion laws do not stop women from aborting. Contraception/Abstinence does. Adoption/Foundling Wheels do. Early childhood support does.
 

AniHawk

Member
Clevinger said:
There's the infanticide smear. Go to fight the smears for info on it.

Besides that, I don't see how he'd be a "staunch supporter" any more than any pro-choice candidate.

I'm wondering if her right-wing pro-Palin cousin sent it to her. They've kept in contact over the years and he's been sending her pro-Palin cartoons (though she hates Palin).
 

devilhawk

Member
AniHawk said:
I'm wondering if her right-wing pro-Palin cousin sent it to her. They've kept in contact over the years and he's been sending her pro-Palin cartoons (though she hates Palin).
This is all I could find: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/07/us/politics/07catholics.html

The other articles I found deal with him side stepping the issue (not a bad thing imo) like at saddleback and when someone asked him about it on the campaign trail. Didn't see anything about being a 'staunch supporter' in recent articles.
 

AniHawk

Member
devilhawk said:
This is all I could find: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/07/us/politics/07catholics.html

The other articles I found deal with him side stepping the issue (not a bad thing imo) like at saddleback and when someone asked him about it on the campaign trail. Didn't see anything about being a 'staunch supporter' in recent articles.

Unless the article didn't appear online, I'm suspecting something fishy going on here. It could have been that very article that was e-mailed to her (oddly two months after it was written), or it could have been part of an e-mail full of smears, conveniently edited. I'll have to talk to her about it. She was pretty upset about it.
 

Clevinger

Member
AniHawk said:
Unless the article didn't appear online, I'm suspecting something fishy going on here. It could have been that very article that was e-mailed to her (oddly two months after it was written), or it could have been part of an e-mail full of smears, conveniently edited. I'll have to talk to her about it. She was pretty upset about it.

The infanticide thing is pretty popular, unfortunately. Whoever it was who likes sending cartoons might have sent your mom a particularly fucked up cartoon showing a garbage can full of dead and bloody babies, from what I remember.
 

Extollere

Sucks at poetry
AniHawk said:
On a side note, my mom read something from The New York Times (supposedly) that said Obama is a "staunch supporter of abortion." I asked her again if that's what it said and she said it was. She's VERY pro-life, about as much as Palin is (so she says), although she's a registered Democrat and definitely wont vote Republican this cycle. So this has left her conflicted.

Is there an article that says this? I did a google search and all that "staunch supporter of abortion" + Obama showed up on were what seemed like anti-Obama and right-wing websites. It seems like a very slanted way of wording things.

Why do people vote based on such small and insignificant issues such as abortion or gay-rights? I don't get it. How about voting about other important issues, such as the direction of the country, how we've basically taken the constitution and took a shit on it, or how our privatized health care system is becoming 2nd rate to other countries. How about our sour ties with should-be allies or our good reputation in this new more globalized world? Instead we're voting on issues like clumps of cells and whether or not we think it's a good idea for us to use our religious beliefs to affect other's lives or rights. The choices represent a lot more (and much more important) issues at hand here than anyone's narrow minded moral responsibilities.
 

devilhawk

Member
Extollere said:
Why do people vote based on such small and insignificant issues such as abortion or gay-rights? I don't get it. How about voting about other important issues, such as the direction of the country, how we've basically taken the constitution and took a shit on it, or how our privatized health care system is becoming 2nd rate to other countries. How about our sour ties with should-be allies or our good reputation in this new more globalized world? Instead we're voting on issues like clumps of cells and whether or not we think it's a good idea for us to use our religious beliefs to affect other's lives or rights. The choices represent a lot more (and much more important) issues at hand here than anyone's narrow minded moral responsibilities.
Blame Rove. Blame the fact that it has worked, twice. It may finally stop after November.

Edit: Haha.Don't know if this came up earlier.
cbsnews said:
CBS News has learned that two donors to the Obama campaign that gave a total of $7,722 appear to have made their contributions under fake names that look like they were written by a mouse running across a keyboard: Dahsudhu Hdusahfd of Df, Hawaii with the following employer CZXVC/ZXVZXV and Uadhshgu Hduadh listed as living in Dhff, Florida listed their employer as DASADA/SAFASF.
 

Desperado

Member
In many religious (Christian) environments and communities in the US, especially in the South, not only does religion become a part of people's world views from a very early age, but close-mindedness and intolerance often accompany their religious "education." Abortion and same-sex rights are linked to religion for them and are thus the crucial issues in a political contest.
 

AniHawk

Member
Extollere said:
Why do people vote based on such small and insignificant issues such as abortion or gay-rights? I don't get it. How about voting about other important issues, such as the direction of the country, how we've basically taken the constitution and took a shit on it, or how our privatized health care system is becoming 2nd rate to other countries. How about our sour ties with should-be allies or our good reputation in this new more globalized world? Instead we're voting on issues like clumps of cells and whether or not we think it's a good idea for us to use our religious beliefs to affect other's lives or rights. The choices represent a lot more (and much more important) issues at hand here than anyone's narrow minded moral responsibilities.

There was a woman in the room nearby having an abortion while I was being born. She says she remembers her just screaming (in a blood-curdling way), and I think it really stuck with her. She's also fairly religious, though I've never seen it play into politics much outside of abortion. I'm also fairly certain she would probably vote Obama despite what she thinks of his stance on abortion now.

Clevinger said:
The infanticide thing is pretty popular, unfortunately. Whoever it was who likes sending cartoons might have sent your mom a particularly fucked up cartoon showing a garbage can full of dead and bloody babies, from what I remember.
Yeah, I'll check back with her tomorrow. If it's her cousin who did it, I think it's about time I talk to the guy.

If he sent her that particular e-mail, it'll be less than cordial, to say the least.
 

Barrett2

Member
AniHawk said:
There was a woman in the room nearby having an abortion while I was being born. She says she remembers her just screaming (in a blood-curdling way), and I think it really stuck with her. She's also fairly religious, though I've never seen it play into politics much outside of abortion. I'm also fairly certain she would probably vote Obama despite what she thinks of his stance on abortion now.

You should also remind your mom that no matter who is President, abortion isn't going anywhere. Even if McCain were to win, nominate a handful of Supreme Court right wingers, and if they were to overturn Casey (the abortion case), about 47 out of 50 states would immediately make abortion legal again.

In that sense, just remind any conservatives you know that abortion isn't going anywhere, so it doesn't matter what the Prez thinks about it, because at the end of the day, they can't do anything about it in the long run.
 

Extollere

Sucks at poetry
AniHawk said:
There was a woman in the room nearby having an abortion while I was being born. She says she remembers her just screaming (in a blood-curdling way), and I think it really stuck with her. She's also fairly religious, though I've never seen it play into politics much outside of abortion. I'm also fairly certain she would probably vote Obama despite what she thinks of his stance on abortion now.


Yeah, I'll check back with her tomorrow. If it's her cousin who did it, I think it's about time I talk to the guy.

If he sent her that particular e-mail, it'll be less than cordial, to say the least.

Well we're talking about a late term abortion then, which I believe Obama doesn't stand for, or at least he's said he'd like to avoid that through education, funding, and information. Chemical abortion and first term abortion is little more than washing away microscopic cells.
 

Extollere

Sucks at poetry
Desperado said:
In many religious (Christian) environments and communities in the US, especially in the South, not only does religion become a part of people's world views from a very early age, but close-mindedness and intolerance often accompany their religious "education." Abortion and same-sex rights are linked to religion for them and are thus the crucial issues in a political contest.

It's frustrating because these issues shouldn't even be tied to politics, one of the great founding qualities of this country was (supposed to be) the separation of church and state. There are no scientific grounds to oppose first term abortion only moral or religious ones. You'd think that most of these so-called patriots would care more about the issues of our economy, our international policies, and the intellect and judgement of the people we elect to put into office.

...bleh
 

M3wThr33

Banned
Judging from the stock market scroll at the end of the keating video, that footage was from mid-september of this year. September 16th.

Make of that what you will.
 

Crayon Shinchan

Aquafina Fanboy
AniHawk said:
On a side note, my mom read something from The New York Times (supposedly) that said Obama is a "staunch supporter of abortion." I asked her again if that's what it said and she said it was. She's VERY pro-life, about as much as Palin is (so she says), although she's a registered Democrat and definitely wont vote Republican this cycle. So this has left her conflicted.

Is there an article that says this? I did a google search and all that "staunch supporter of abortion" + Obama showed up on were what seemed like anti-Obama and right-wing websites. It seems like a very slanted way of wording things.

What he is, is pro-choice, within reason. 1st trimester, yadda yadda, yadda.

He's focused on making sure women are informed about the choices that are been made, as well as focusing on preventing unwanted pregnancies from happening, so that they don't even have to face these hard choices.

Like Hito said... if she is concerned about abortions... then number of abortions will drop under Obama.
 
Deus Ex Machina said:
Photos: Protest over anti-Obama sign, Hendersonville, NC

Contact Info: http://landoftheskyrealty.homesandland.com/ContactRealtor.cfm?WebsiteId=33878&WebpageId=

1000514ik3.jpg


1000515ja4.jpg


1000516xu0.jpg


1000517jk3.jpg
That happened in my state? For shame, NC.

Oh and debate tonight!:D
 

JayDubya

Banned
AniHawk said:
Is there an article that says this? I did a google search and all that "staunch supporter of abortion" + Obama showed up on were what seemed like anti-Obama and right-wing websites. It seems like a very slanted way of wording things.

There's nothing to use to dispute that fact with your mother, because a fact it is.

He's a NARAL / PP posterboy. Many of these organizations were more eager to endorse him than Hillary.

That crap Hito was spewing is only something that pro-abortion dems say to try and court religious Independents and make it seem like on the most polarizing issue there is, there's somehow common ground.

Extollere said:
There are no scientific grounds to oppose first term abortion only moral or religious ones.

a) Scientific grounds are an excellent basis for the opposition of abortion.

b) "______ are human beings, they deserve respect, and legal protection of their rights" is a liberal position, and it's also a moral / ethical position.
 

AniHawk

Member
JayDubya said:
There's nothing to use to dispute that fact with your mother, because a fact it is.

He's a NARAL / PP posterboy. Many of these organizations were more eager to endorse him than Hillary.

I was asking for clarification before I talked to her again. After an initial search showed up nothing on what she said, I took it here. Devilhawk was helpful. You're being an ass.
 

JayDubya

Banned
AniHawk said:
I was asking for clarification before I talked to her again. After an initial search showed up nothing on what she said, I took it here. Devilhawk was helpful. You're being an ass.

Whatev. NARAL endorsed him over Hillary because they approved of his record as a state and federal legislator.

To the extent that he moderates his tone with demographics like the religious left / centrists, he's talking out of both sides of his mouth - something all politicians do, but hey.
 

AniHawk

Member
JayDubya said:
Whatev. NARAL endorsed him over Hillary because they approved of his record as a state and federal legislator.

To the extent that he moderates his tone with the religious left / centrists, he's talking out of both sides of his mouth - something all politicians do, but hey.

Here's the thing: it's really doubtful that my mom picked up a copy of the New York Times from two months ago, especially considering that we live on the west coast. If someone, like her cousin, who she generally trusts, is trying to shape her political views and scare her out of a vote, it's crossing a line. If it was in an LA Times article, fine, but you don't fuck with my family.

EDIT: Whew. Found the article. Crisis averted.

Sorry that I called you an ass there, Jay, but I was looking at it at a personal level, and I took it as you were trying to inject your own belief system at a general level, like you didn't really care (I know you have really strong opinions about the issue, so that's not true either).
 

Hitokage

Setec Astronomer
JayDubya said:
That crap Hito was spewing is only something that pro-abortion dems say to try and court religious Independents and make it seem like on the most polarizing issue there is, there's somehow common ground.
Not everyone can rise to your level of supreme moral perfection, oh great rational one.
 

Lemonz

Member
Jerome Corsi, anti-Obama author, detained in Kenya :D

A leading American neo-Conservative author has been detained by immigration authorities in Kenya as he tried to launch a book smearing Barack Obama.

Jerome Corsi, of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth fame, was this morning being held after failing to reckon with Obamamania.

He had been planning to launch his book, entitled The Obama Nation Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality, before travelling to one of Nairobi’s slums to donate money to the Senator’s half-brother George, who was found living in squalid conditions two months ago.

Dr Corsi said he had a $1,000 cheque for George Obama, seen as part of a stunt to suggest that the Senator was not taking care of his Kenyan-based relative.

A source at Nyayo House, where Dr Corsi was being held, said the author had been detained for references made to Raila Odinga, the Kenyan prime minister, and allegations that his Muslim supporters had engaged in a wave of violence that rocked the country after December’s disputed elections.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/africa/article4897758.ece
 

Gattsu25

Banned
typhonsentra said:
Vestal said:
What did Colmes do now?
He brought it up right away that the "Terrorist" Morris and Hannity were railing against never killed anyone, never attempted to kill anyone, and was never convicted of any crimes (Yes, I know why but if he was still dangerous we all know they would've gotten him on something unrelated by now).

He then called it the dying breathes of a desperate campaign and forced Morris to agree with that line, and then pointed out that the Annenberg Challenge which conserrvative shills use to connect Obama to Ayers was was sponsored by the foundation of a former Reagan administation ambassador. He did decent.

Just now even even brought up Palin's connection to that secessionist party! Atta boy!
Is there a youtube of this?
 
I would like some videos of Colmes owning or Hannity being owned. I've only watched the show a few times, but it infuriates me how the format seems set up for Hannity to win every argument.
 
Yeah, Hannity clearly has all creative control over the show so it's always framed the way Hannity once but there's little Colmes can do about that. He works with what he has.
 
typhonsentra said:
Yeah, Hannity clearly has all creative control over the show so it's always framed the way Hannity once but there's little Colmes can do about that. He works with what he has.
One wonders why he does it at all. He's clearly not the combative type either like Olberman is. He's all polite and self-effacing while Hannity just rides over the top of him with his bully-boy persona.

Now Olberman & Hannity would be a match-up for the ages.
 
JayDubya said:
That crap Hito was spewing is only something that pro-abortion dems say to try and court religious Independents and make it seem like on the most polarizing issue there is, there's somehow common ground.
Crap? Facts.

JayDubya said:
a) Scientific grounds are an excellent basis for the opposition of abortion.
It is a legal matter, not a science matter.

And if it science is a big reason then why did you just talk about religious Independents.
 
Hitokage said:
Not everyone can rise to your level of supreme moral perfection, oh great rational one.
Rational? Naw, it is simple-minded need for a black & white rule. Good v. Evil, True v. False, With us or against us. Life just isn't that simple. If it were, Newtonian physics would suffice, but instead we need quantum physics.
 
viciouskillersquirrel said:
I would like some videos of Colmes owning or Hannity being owned. I've only watched the show a few times, but it infuriates me how the format seems set up for Hannity to win every argument.
Just look at the two guys . . . they were cast like roles in a movie. They pick a brawny handsome guy for Hannity and they found the weirdest meek looking guy for Colmes. I guess Colmes could start acting more uppity but he would probably get booted off the show then . . . he probably makes good money and probably wouldn't find a better job, so why would he do that?
 
speculawyer said:
Just look at the two guys . . . they were cast like roles in a movie. They pick a brawny handsome guy for Hannity and they found the weirdest meek looking guy for Colmes. I guess Colmes could start acting more uppity but he would probably get booted off the show then . . . he probably makes good money and probably wouldn't find a better job, so why would he do that?
Moral grounds? Not wanting to be a part of the US right-wing propaganda machine?
 

StoOgE

First tragedy, then farce.
Obama's new ad going after McCain for changing the subject is pretty good. I dont have a link, morning Joe just played it.
 

Cheebs

Member
It's not a real ad. It's going on "national cable" only which means its little more than a press release for the media.
 

StoOgE

First tragedy, then farce.
Cheebs said:
It's not a real ad. It's going on "national cable" only which means its little more than a press release for the media.

Its still well done, and lets face it controlling the media narrative is more important.
 

scorcho

testicles on a cold fall morning
Krowley said:
No I'm not claiming that. I'm saying that the sorts of regulations needed to curtail sub prime lending wouldn't have been popular with the democrats because they don't want to make it harder for people to buy houses. It wouldn't have been popular with republicans either, because it was making the banks a shit load of money. So there are reasons to avoid the issue on both sides of the isle. If anybody had even tried to fix this in advance, they would have been laughed off the stage by both sides.

"lets puncture this housing bubble before it gets too big" would not have been a popular bill at all.
This was a bipartisan fuckup, but I'm not sure that most Democrats knew how lax regulation was on the financial side. At least from the Bush Administration's standpoint, rising house prices and cheap credit padded the GDP numbers, so who cares. Greenspan didn't; Bush didn't.

Dax01 said:
So I was wondering, how bad do you guys think the economy is going to get before it gets better?
Short: Pretty bad.
 

1-D_FTW

Member
Deus Ex Machina said:
Photos: Protest over anti-Obama sign, Hendersonville, NC

Contact Info: http://landoftheskyrealty.homesandland.com/ContactRealtor.cfm?WebsiteId=33878&WebpageId=

1000514ik3.jpg


1000515ja4.jpg


1000516xu0.jpg


1000517jk3.jpg

Kind of reminds me of a right-wing church I often drive by. It's on an unpopulated road (so there's usually no cars around), but they often have the most obnoxious slogans on their sign. And lateley, I've been finding myself flipping it the bird and yelling, "fuck you" as I drive past. If Obamo loses for the Dems again, I'm pretty sure I'll be ready for the Revolution.
 
BTW, to chime in on the 1999 repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act led by Phil Gramm: what this allowed banks to do is to securitize mortgages and then sell these securities. This is the primary driver for the mortgage crisis by creating a new type of financial product/investment vehicle that could not have otherwise been created.

Repeat this to yourself: the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, led by Phil Gramm on behalf of Citi (and other banks), allowed mortgages to be packaged into financial instruments which could be sold as an investment vehicle in the financial markets.

If there is any doubt as to what caused the crash, you only have to look and see who profited the most from the repeal of the Glass-Steagall and the consequent rise in mortgages: real estate investors, land developers, mortgage lenders, and -- of course -- banks. It's not just the poor who went over their heads, it was the middle class and even the wealthy upper class (Foreclosures on million-dollar homes surge) lead on by this myth that housing prices will always rise so that it's okay to buy more than you can afford because you can always cash out for a profit. Even the banks and lenders bought into this idea, fed by a few good years of insane rises in housing prices.

The fancy loans were created, in part, to create more product -- mortgages -- to sell to investors. These products were viewed as "safe" because people wouldn't want to lose their homes, would they? Besides, everyone knew that home prices always rise, right? There's no way these products would fail so spectacularly. Every new loan made was more product to sell to investors. Banks and mortgage lenders were giving them out like candy to anyone that wanted one. Think about this: no responsible lender in their right mind should ever provide 100% financing with nothing down. No fucking way. It was all about creating more mortgages.

I'm not trying to blame the rich or anything like that, but the fact of the matter is that this boom was driven by greed at all levels but made possible by lobbyists for banks (in particular, Citigroup). Look at the value of financial stocks from 1999 onwards to the crash. You'll see that their stock values rose to obscene levels based in large part to the popularity of these new investment vehicles.

The blame for Clinton comes into play because he signed it into law. But what is rarely mentioned is that it was a veto proof bill. He could not have vetoed it due to the overwhelming support for it in Congress (Citigroup spent millions of dollars lobbying for this repeal).
 
R2K: Obama 52, McCain 41

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27053921/
If you’re among those who speculate that the only thing better than Tina Fey doing Sarah Palin on “Saturday Night Live” would be Sarah Palin making a cameo on the show, there might be hope yet.

If the buzz is to be believed, the NBC show is working to get the vice-presidential candidate and Alaska governor on air before the election.

and, ummm, it's DEBATE DAY!
 
WTF? this is front page news on MSNBC

McCain linked to group in Iran-Contra case

GOP presidential nominee John McCain has past connections to a private group that supplied aid to guerrillas seeking to overthrow the leftist government of Nicaragua in the Iran-Contra affair.

McCain's ties are facing renewed scrutiny after his campaign criticized Barack Obama for his link to a former radical who engaged in violent acts 40 years ago.

The U.S. Council for World Freedom was part of an international organization linked to former Nazi collaborators and ultra-right-wing death squads in Central America. The group was dedicated to stamping out communism around the globe.
Story continues below ↓advertisement

The council's founder, retired Army Maj. Gen. John Singlaub, said McCain became associated with the organization in the early 1980s as McCain was launching his political career in Arizona. Singlaub said McCain was a supporter but not an active member in the group.

'New guy on the block'
"McCain was a new guy on the block learning the ropes," Singlaub told The Associated Press in an interview. "I think I met him in the Washington area when he was just a new congressman. We had McCain on the board to make him feel like he wasn't left out. It looks good to have names on a letterhead who are well-known and appreciated.

"I don't recall talking to McCain at all on the work of the group," Singlaub said.

The renewed attention over McCain's association with Singlaub's group comes as McCain's campaign steps up criticism of Obama's dealings with William Ayers, a college professor who co-founded the Weather Underground and years later worked on education reform in Chicago alongside Obama. Ayers held a meet-the-candidate event at his home when Obama first ran for public office in the mid-1990s.

Obama was roughly 8 years old when Ayers, now at the University of Illinois at Chicago, was working with the Weather Underground, which took responsibility for bombings that included nonfatal blasts at the Pentagon and U.S. Capitol. McCain's vice presidential nominee, Sarah Palin, has said that Obama "pals around with terrorists."

In McCain's case, Singlaub knew McCain's father, a Navy admiral who had sought Singlaub's counsel when McCain, a Navy pilot, became a prisoner of war and spent 5 1/2 years in North Vietnamese hands.

"John's father asked me for advice about what he ought to do now that his son had been shot down and captured," Singlaub recalled in one of two recent interviews. "I said, 'As long as you don't give any impression that you care more about him than you care about any of the other prisoners, he won't be treated any differently.'"

Covert arms shipments
Covert arms shipments to the rebels called Contras, financed in part by secret arms sales to Iran, became known as the Iran-Contra affair. They proved to be the undoing of Singlaub's council.

In 1987, the Internal Revenue Service withdrew the tax-exempt status of Singlaub's group because of its activities on behalf of the Contras.

Elected to the House in 1982 and at a time when he was on the board of Singlaub's council, McCain was among Republicans on Capitol Hill expressing support for the Contras, a CIA-organized guerrilla force in Central America. In 1984, Congress cut off CIA funds for the Contras.

Months before the cutoff, top Reagan administration officials ramped up a secret White House-directed supply network and put National Security Council aide Oliver North in charge of running it. The goal was to keep the Contras operational until Congress could be persuaded to resume CIA funding.

Click for related content
NYT: Campaigns shift to attack mode
McCain accuses Obama of lying
Palin expands character attacks

Singlaub's private group became the public cover for the White House operation.

Secretly, Singlaub worked with North in an effort to raise millions of dollars from foreign governments.

McCain resignation?
McCain has said previously he resigned from the council in 1984 and asked in 1986 to have his name removed from the group's letterhead.

"I didn't know whether (the group's activity) was legal or illegal, but I didn't think I wanted to be associated with them," McCain said in a newspaper interview in 1986.

Singlaub does not recall any McCain resignation in 1984 or May 1986. Nor does Joyce Downey, who oversaw the group's day-to-day activities.

"That's a surprise to me," Singlaub said. "This is the first time I've ever heard that. There may have been someone in his office communicating with our office."

"I don't ever remember hearing about his resigning, but I really wasn't worried about that part of our activities, a housekeeping thing," said Singlaub. "If he didn't want to be on the board that's OK. It wasn't as if he had been active participant and we were going to miss his help. He had no active interest. He certainly supported us."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27062761
 

MaddenNFL64

Member
That's the main fucking issue. If mortgages were not allowed to be sold as securities, and these investment banks, and insurance companies weren't selling bullshit "swaps", which is basically unregulated, no mandate to be funded insurance. This is the shit that brought us down. The housing crisis would have stayed a housing crisis, without polluting everything. Complete, unabashed risky greed.
 

Blackhead

Redarse
viciouskillersquirrel said:
Moral grounds? Not wanting to be a part of the US right-wing propaganda machine?
What's that excuse Aaron Eckhart used in Thank you for Smoking. Something about paying the mortgage...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom