McCain phone message about Ayers

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-13-2008
McCain phone message about Ayers
142
Sat, 10-18-2008 - 9:19am

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Republicans launched an enormous wave of phone calls Thursday blasting Sen. Barack Obama for "having worked closely with domestic terrorist Bill Ayers," party sources said.


Didn't McCain say @

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-03-2008
Sat, 10-18-2008 - 11:12am

I highly doubt it. I know I for one will be totally resentful if McCain should possibly win, which will take cheating or a miracle for him to win. I do not like his TAX plan, I do not like his Health plan, I do not want my DH to be taxed on our lousy Health ins plan. It is high time to help the MIDDLE CLASS! or nothing will change. We need a president that stands up to the Drug companies, and to the Insurance companies, not a president to coddle to them! Look at it this way, if Obama wins the Republicans will be outraged/resentful, and if McCain wins, the Democrats will be outraged resentful, so how can we get unity? We can't, sad but true. too much damage has been done by Bush!

Avatar for songwright
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-28-1997
Sat, 10-18-2008 - 11:18am

OK . . . so please explain how ANY of this matters in this election.

~ SW

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-26-2008
Sat, 10-18-2008 - 11:20am
lol - ok whatever...
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-18-2008
Sat, 10-18-2008 - 11:47am
>>> Let's get off the talking points. <<<

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-20-2008
Sat, 10-18-2008 - 1:41pm

McCain was really really lucky to get away with what he did in the Keating 5 scandal.

Here is what happened:

"On his Keating Five experience, McCain has said: "The appearance of it was wrong. It's a wrong appearance when a group of senators appear in a meeting with a group of regulators, because it conveys the impression of undue and improper influence. And it was the wrong thing to do."
Regardless of the level of their involvement, both senators were greatly affected by it. McCain would write in 2002 that attending the two April 1987 meetings was "the worst mistake of my life". Glenn has described the Senate Ethics Committee investigation as the low point of his life.
The Senate Ethics Committee did not pursue, for lack of jurisdiction, any possible ethics breaches in McCain's delayed reimbursements to Keating for trips at the latter's expense, because they occurred while McCain was in the House. The House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct said that it too lacked jurisdiction, because McCain was no longer in the House. It said it did not require that McCain amend his existing financial disclosure forms for his House years, on the grounds that McCain had now fully reimbursed Keating's company."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keating_Five#Glenn_and_McCain:_cleared_of_impropriety_but_criticized_for_poor_judgment

And I strongly suggest that you watch this video by a former banking regulator:

http://www.keatingeconomics.com/

And here is some more in case you are really interested:

"Ethics Committee Special Counsel Said McCain Had Closest Relationship to Keating. Robert Bennett, the Special Counsel for the Senate Ethics Committee said during the 1990 hearings: “of the five senators here before you, Senator McCain had the closest personal friendship with Charles Keating. Their friendship predated Senator McCain's political career. Senator McCain also was the only one who received personal as well political benefits from Charles Keating.”

McCain Received $166,000 In Campaign Contributions from Charles Keating and his Associates. “Together with friends and associates, Keating contributed $56,000 to McCain's first House race, another $56,000 to the second and $54,000 to his 1986 Senate campaign,” contributions that were key to early success as a politician.
McCain Used Keating’s Private Planes on Nine Occasions. “From August 1984 to August 1986, Sen. John McCain and his family flew across the country and to the Bahamas on at least nine occasions at Charles H Keating Jr.'s expense,” often to stay at the Keatings’ exclusive Cat Cay getaway.
McCain Had Direct Financial Ties To Keating. Keating brought in McCain’s wife and father-in-law as the largest investors in an Arizona shopping center investment. Fountain Square Shopping Center was a no-risk investment that virtually guaranteed a 25% return and a “significant tax write-off” through a tax shelter technique available to the wealthy that was soon outlawed. When reporters first questioned the deal, McCain said to reporters “It’s up to you to find that out, kids.”
McCain Originally Denied Reports of Connection. “When the story broke, McCain did nothing to help himself. ‘You're a liar,’ McCain said” when asked about the investments. He challenged reporters saying, ‘It's up to you to find that out, kids.’”
McCain Rebuked By Senate Ethics Committee For Exercising “Poor Judgment.” In 1990, the bipartisan (three members of each party) Senate Ethics Committee rebuked McCain “for exercising ‘poor judgment’ for intervening with the federal regulators on behalf of Keating.”

Keating’s S&L Was Declared Insolvent; $3.4 Billion Bailout Most Expensive in Meltdown. Federal regulators declared Lincoln Savings and Loan insolvent. It ended up costing taxpayers $3.4 billion to clean up the mess and cover federally-insured deposits at Lincoln, making it the most expensive failure in the entire S&L meltdown.

Keating Also Bilked 23,000 Investors – Many Elderly – With Junk Bonds. As his deeds unraveled under the scrutiny of regulators and civil and criminal court cases, it became clear that he had sold worthless junk bonds to 23,000 investors, many of them elderly retirees who had thought their investments were insured and lost their lost savings to Keating’s crimes.

Keating Was Found Guilty of 73 Counts of Fraud, Lost Two Criminal And One Civil Case. “a federal jury convicted him of 73 counts of wire and bankruptcy fraud in the collapse of American Continental and Lincoln,” a keystone of the Savings & Loan scandal as Keating “looted” the bank. Keating was also found guilty in civil court and lost a massive class action suit by investors he bilked. "

http://www.keatingeconomics.com/

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-07-2008
Sat, 10-18-2008 - 2:03pm

And when exactly did he stop voting 'with Bush'? When he began running for president? Last week? When? So HOW is it misleading if it is still true?

On a side note it is ok to take it out of context if it reflects badly on Obama, but not if it reflects badly on McCain? Is that really how it works? Good to know.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-25-2006
Sat, 10-18-2008 - 2:25pm

<< I live in NC>>

Well, that explains it! I think you need to move to Washingto D.C., or any inner city neighborhood, right now. After you see and live alongside some of the abject minorities, perhaps you'll understand why we liberals don't agree with you.

-----------------------------------------------
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2009/october/meet_the_new_health_.php

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQTBYQlQ7yM

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-14-2008
Sat, 10-18-2008 - 3:17pm

Really?

Where are these book reviews?

And not the one-sentence "review" he gave orally in response to a Chicago Trib. reporter's question in a profile of Obama ("what are you reading these days?"). If Obama actually reviewed these books, where are the reviews?

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-14-2008
Sat, 10-18-2008 - 3:25pm

We can agree to disagree, but it's helpful, if you're going to disagree with someone on a matter of fact, to have the actual facts on one's side. In this case, you don't. Obama has spent more money on attack ads than McCain because he's enjoyed a huge cash advantage over McCain throughout the course of this campaign, not because he's running a horribly negative campaign, like John McCain is. If you look at the figures expressed as a percentage of the TOTAL amount spent on media advertising from the respective campaigns, it's not even close. Obama's total negative ad budget hovers around 30-35% of his total media buys. McCain's is at or near 100% for the last several weeks, ever since Ick Davis went on cable TV and literally told the American public that this campaign "wasn't going to be about the issues."

This is the same obfuscatory tactic that the wingnuts used in 2004, when (after Dubya was reelected with the smallest margin of any incumbent President in HISTORY) they crowed triumphantly that Dubya had received more votes than any candidate in history. Technically true....but hardly indicative of anything at all, when you take into account that John Kerry, in the same election, ALSO had more people vote for HIM than for any President in history. It's a simple function of the increase in the sheer numbers of the population, and the fact that the election was so close. GoOPers just LOVE to find one true-but-irrelevant statistic, and harp on IT and IT alone to try to turn results which are mediocre at best in terms of what it says about their own party, into some sort of monumental triumph, when nothing of the kind is even remotely true....and a quick perusal of the facts which are actually important reveals that quite clearly.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-14-2008
Sat, 10-18-2008 - 3:26pm
Who just socialized our financial system?

Pages