Obama, the “Democrat” Opposes Homeowners Rescue Plan

Let that sink in for a minute.

According to the AP piece, Obama camp says McCain Mortgage Plan unworkable, Obama is suddenly concerned that the taxpayer would be unduly burdened:

Democrat Barack Obama’s campaign criticized John McCain’s mortgage bailout plan Wednesday, saying it would cause the government to lose money by paying too much for bad loans.

McCain’s proposal to spend $300 billion in federal funds to buy distressed mortgages was a highlight of Tuesday’s presidential debate, and it seemed to catch Obama off guard. At first, Obama’s campaign said he had made similar proposals and there was nothing new in McCain’s remarks. …

McCain’s proposal would devote nearly half the $700 billion from the recent financial rescue package to buying troubled mortgages directly, rather than indirectly aiding the nation’s financial markets.

What’s wrong with this picture?  Helping strapped homeowners get back on track to pay their mortgages is in everyone’s best interest.  It’s not a Republican or Democrat thing.  It’s the *right* thing.  What is the point of forcing families into foreclosure on loans that suddenly ballooned beyond the homeowner’s ability to pay?  A homeowner who walks away from a mortgage is paying the bank nothing.  That interrupts the flow of money into the financial system.  Is it in the interest of other homeowners to see multiple foreclosures in their neighborhoods?  That sort of depresses house values, doesn’t it?  So, it seems like renegotiating the terms of these loans would be a very good idea for taxpayers who now have a stake in the banks who have been subsumed.

Who is actually hurt by this?  I can’t think of anyone who loses- except for the people who were gambling on big returns and are going to have to settle for a lot less.  You know, those people who played with credit default swaps and stuff like that?  The ones who really have no idea what the value of those assets are?  Buying up the mortgages sort of puts a value on them, doesn’t it?  I guess it is to the financial whiz kidz’ advantage to keep that all fuzzy and nebulous because there is always a chance they would get more than the asset is actually worth, (sort of like the fuzzy and nebulous Obama himself).  Right?  Am I reading this right, Dakinikat?

So, it *appears* that John McCain does not see any downside for the taxpayer in this deal because the money will start flowing again and all those banks we bought might start to be solvent.  But Barack Obama is trying to protect taxpayers from an additional burden.

Uh-Huh.  Which taxpayers would they be again?

I can’t wait to see how the cognitively dissonant are going to spin this.

Update: Kudos to madamab whose earlier post, Annnnnd, worst debate ever, my friends has made WaPo’s Political Browser page!  Pretty darn good for one of them opera types.  😉

Also, stay tuned for The Lions Share on PUR tonight at 8PM EST.

Annnnnnd, Worst Debate Ever, My Friends

One Bored PUMA

Ooof! Was last night awful, or what? Terrible, banal questions. Terrible moderation, with Tom Brokaw sounding like the lockjawed girlfriend of the nephew in “Auntie Mame” (Top drawer!). Talking points and verbal tics galore from our two candidates (Obama’s “Annnnnnnnnnnnd” matched equally with McCain’s constant repetition of “my friends”), with very few standout moments for either. As in the first debate, the shadow of Hillary loomed large – her energy, her humanity, her solid commitment to Democratic principles, her delicious wonky command of each and every issue – and neither man even came close to matching her, although I was happy to hear McCain espousing her plan to renegotiate mortgages so that homeowners could stay in their homes (a pleasant surprise indeed!). In all honesty, I could barely stay awake through the whole thing.

There were a few things to remark upon, however. So let us begin the obligatory post-debate analysis, shall we? (For those who managed to avoid the snoozefest, a full transcript can be found here.)

Social Security?

What was going on here?

Brokaw: There are lots of issues that we are going to be dealing with here tonight. And we have a question from Langdon (ph) in Ballston Spa, New York, and that’s about huge unfunded obligations for Social Security, Medicare, and other entitlement programs that will soon eat up all of the revenue that’s in place and then go into a deficit position.

Since the rules are pretty loose here, I’m going to add my own to this one. Instead of having a discussion, let me ask you as a coda to that. Would you give Congress a date certain to reform Social Security and Medicare within two years after you take office? Because in a bipartisan way, everyone agrees, that’s a big ticking time bomb that will eat us up maybe even more than the mortgage crisis.

Giant. Red. Flag. Alert!!!!!

Calling Social Security and Medicare “entitlement programs” is neither accurate nor conducive to constructive reforms. Social Security and Medicare are part of a social safety net that prevents millions of our citizens from falling into desperate poverty. Moreover, these programs are being paid for through taxes, and every working person pays into them. There is nothing “entitled” about people who receive the benefits they have earned.

Wednesday: His penis didn’t drop off

At the risk of sounding like an echo chamber, I’m reprinting this comment from MABlue that Edgeoforever at Not Your Sweetie found at our site:

“Why is this guy never supposed to do anything, take any position or win a debate before being declared the winner?”

“Obama still has the main characteristics that led me to support him. He didn’t drop dead during the debate, which means he still has a pulse. His penis didn’t drop off during the debate,which means it’s still attached. I don’t have any other real requirements, he can eat puppies onstage for all I care.”–the punditry

Oh, I don’t know if those are the only requirements but it does appear at times that the media has beer googles where Obama is concerned.

Neither of the remaining candidates is the one I would have chosen to be president.   The one *I* wanted, indeed, much of the country wanted, was taken away from us.  The media should be on notice.  We aren’t going to forget its part in sidelining Hillary for a long, long time. But Obama most certainly did NOT win that debate last night.  McCain had a slight edge over Obama for one reason- he took risks.

McCain was as forthcoming as he could be without pissing people off.  My Friends, the government of George W. Bush has been so successful at achieving the Conservative Movement’s goals that pissing people off is the inevitable outcome for the forseeable future.  We are royally screwed nine times til Sunday.  As Dakinikat said last night, if you have a job, consider yourself lucky and hang onto it.  It’s going to get rough, maybe rougher than we’ve ever known in our lives.  There are some social safety net programs that will need to be restructured.  Social Security can probably get by with a tweak with no restructuring, assuming the economy recovers in some not too distant future.  Medicare is the juggernaut that will do us in if we’re not proactive about fixing it.  We need to curb our dependence on foreign sources of energy and reduce greenhouse gases.  That means we have to seriously consider nuclear energy.  McCain was right to introduce these subjects during the debate because they are very serious and we can’t turn our heads and pretend that “Hope!” and “Change!” are going to fix things.

I didn’t hear Barack Obama go out on a limb for anything.  His healthcare proposals are better than McCain’s but that’s because they are rip offs of Hillary’s.  McCain copied Hillary on the HOLC proposal.  I give McCain points but not Obama because McCain really *is* bucking his party’s position on HOLC where Obama is not taking a risk on healthcare.  For Obama, it’s a safe position to take.  Healthcare is not likely to get addressed in the next administration anyway.  Why is that?  Because there’s no money.  At least John McCain is putting  the horse before the cart by trying to solve the economic crisis at its roots.  Solving the mortgage crisis is an essential but currently missing portion of digging ourselves out of the financial meltdown that is going to ruin our economy.  Obama barely mentioned it in passing.

But it hardly matters that McCain’s approach seems to be more practical especially given the parameters he will be working with.  Obama has a penis and it did not fall off.  It stayed attached and that’s all that matters.  We will lower the standards for him like we have done all primary season like a game of bumper bowling.  He simply can not miss.  We who were subjected to that incoherent rambling style and find it free of substance will be declared racists for not appreciating the impact of his historic candidacy, the beauty of his mere presence on that stage where no one like him has ever been before.

But it is the spirit of Hillary Clinton hovering over both candidates that I feel most acutely.  Both candidates make reference to her.  We shouldn’t look back or regret what has happened.  We should only look forward.  Yes, she would have made a better debater, policy maker and president.

Alas, she did not have a penis.

More on the debate and the economic crisis can be found in this post at Anglachel (here’s hoping she has recovered from her psychogenic fugue.)