Hopes Remain For McCain In Republican...

Hopes Remain For McCain In Republican-Heavy Towns

There are 40 comments on the Hartford Courant story from Oct 28, 2008, titled Hopes Remain For McCain In Republican-Heavy Towns. In it, Hartford Courant reports that:

Seeking slashes of red in our deep blue state, I traveled Tuesday to the Republican-heavy towns of Middlebury , Brookfield and Litchfield.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Hartford Courant.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Since: May 08

Topsham, ME

#1 Oct 29, 2008
article wrote:
Her family's income doesn't rise above the $250,000 threshold Obama said he will use to raise taxes, Parker said, but she doesn't trust that he will hold to that line if elected.
No one in their right mind should.

Obama's tax increases on the rich are expected to raise $30-35 billion.

Obama is going to inherit a $1 trillion budget deficit, yet he still promises to increase government spending by another $3.3 trillion. He says he can pay for this by taxing only the rich and closing corporate tax loopholes.

The whole thing reminds me of that old joke...

Q: How can you tell if a politician is lying to you?
A: His lips are moving.
Ann Theresa

AOL

#2 Oct 29, 2008
What a stupid article.
America Will Fail

Mansfield Center, CT

#3 Oct 29, 2008
Should Obama be annointed the first Socialist Premier of the Republic of the United States, America will fail.

It will fail socially, economically, politically and morally.

Here are a few reminders:

20 years of delusional spiritual guidance fom a man that swears white people created AIDS to wipe out the African American race.

A campaign that was started in the livingroom of a well known anarchasist and domestic terrorist.

CONFIRMED membership in the American Socialist Party while a Ill. state senator.

Questionable birth. Grandmother swears she witnessed his birth in Kenya.

History of proven appreciation and ties to Farrakhan.

A memoir that explicitly tells how he despised white people - including his own white family.

An ongoing desire to redistribute the wealth - as described in his public radio interview as state sensator.

Connection with ACORN.

I can provide the links to ALL of these if you like - for sake of space - I didn't include them.

Save America, save democracy! Vote No-Bama in November and tell them, "Keep the Change!"
USA

United States

#5 Oct 29, 2008
JESSE,JESSE,JESSE
THE REASON YOU CAN'T FIND MCCAIN SUPPORTERS
IS THAT YOUR CANVASSING IS WRONG. DON'T LOOK FOR BLUE BLAZERS OR GUN RACKS, LOOK FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE WORKING AND PAYING TAXES.....
JTA

Bolton, CT

#7 Oct 29, 2008
Wow, its amazing to me that the deperate McCain camp can label a "tax cut" as "redistributing wealth" and it actually resonates with you people. We've had 8 years of these crazy scare tactics and all its gotten us into is a baseless war in Iraq, the worst financial crisis our country has seen in decades and the loss of jobs to other countries.
Sad but true

West Hartford, CT

#8 Oct 29, 2008
USA wrote:
JESSE,JESSE,JESSE
THE REASON YOU CAN'T FIND MCCAIN SUPPORTERS
IS THAT YOUR CANVASSING IS WRONG. DON'T LOOK FOR BLUE BLAZERS OR GUN RACKS, LOOK FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE WORKING AND PAYING TAXES.....
You hit the nail on the head!!!!!
NoRepublicanLeft Behind

United States

#9 Oct 29, 2008
So the real question is: why aren't persons who think Democrats are socialists or (worse) communists voting for Barr rather than a centrist like McCain?
Dice

Miami, FL

#11 Oct 29, 2008
The Republicans started out claiming he was a Muslim. That didn't stick, so now they are calling him a Communist. After he wins the election they will be calling him the Antichrist.
wondering

Newington, CT

#13 Oct 29, 2008
Dice wrote:
The Republicans started out claiming he was a Muslim. That didn't stick, so now they are calling him a Communist. After he wins the election they will be calling him the Antichrist.
Obama claims to be black. He is not black, he is biracial.
JBC

Greenfield, MA

#14 Oct 29, 2008
I couldn't be more disappointed with the Courant. How this newspaper could endorse an unabashed socialist is, to quote the paper's choice for president, "above my pay grade." Yes, we do need big changes in Washington.

However, Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama is anything but the change we need. Look closely.

Obama is simply recycling the big government, mommy-state policies of Presidents Lyndon Johnson and Jimmy Carter, and a century of mostly Democratic Congresses that recklessly maneuvered taxpayers into our current financial straits.

A day could be lost refuting each line of the Courant's Post's board endorsement, but I'll rely on my grandfather who always reminds me that "the mind can only absorb what the rear end can endure" and restrict my comments to the economy.

The Courant lauds Obama's plan to punish "the rich" with tax hikes. Have we really strayed so far from our common-sense capitalist roots? An American president isn't supposed to govern for one class of individuals. I don't recall seeing in the Constitution that only "the rich" or "the middle class" have a right to "pursue happiness."

In a bizarre 1995 speech, Obama even attacked "white executives living out in the suburbs who don't want to pay taxes for inner city children."!

Is this rhetoric the transformative hope and change endorsed by the Courant editorial board? Doubtful. Furthermore, Obama's socialist ideology is a financial fantasy ungrounded in sound facts.
Comparison Analogy

Mansfield Center, CT

#15 Oct 29, 2008
Let's examine a clearly Democratic, loyal and patriotic speech with one that isn't!:

JFK - And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country.

Obama (2001 WBEX Boston), generally, the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties, says what the states can't do to you, says what the federal government can't do to you, but it doesn't say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf.

Can we make comparisons now? Isn't it painfully obvious to the sheep that followed the wolf into the pasture that the slaughter will commence once he is - if he is - annointed the new Premier of the People's Socialist Repubic of the United States?

The Kool-Aid should be wearing off soon.......

As a two-time Bill CLinton supporter and registered independent, I ask everyone to remember:

SEMPER FIDELIS!(Always Faithful)
Comparison Analogy

Mansfield Center, CT

#16 Oct 29, 2008
Dice wrote:
The Republicans started out claiming he was a Muslim. That didn't stick, so now they are calling him a Communist. After he wins the election they will be calling him the Antichrist.
If the shoe fits!
JBC

Greenfield, MA

#17 Oct 29, 2008
First, no one benefits when taxes go up.

The $250,000 and up category are largely not of the yachting class or Greenwich Country Club elite.

Rather, these hardworking Americans are the small business owners who live on our streets. It's the guy who owns a small trucking company in Bristol, the woman who operates a coffee shop in Collinsvilled or the pizzeria proprietor in Woodbury. These men and women comprise the heart and soul of CT's economy. They also manage to generate a plurality of the employment opportunities for individuals of all socio-economic classes.

So what happens when taxes go up? Some employers facing higher tax burdens will choose to lay off employees or cut shifts. Other employers will pass the increased cost of doing business on to consumers.

Most employers will do both. Suddenly the family of five is working less and paying more. The trucking company will charge 25 percent more for the same cargo haul, the coffee shop will fire the part-time help and the pizzeria will demand $5 more on every pie. It's a vicious cycle that makes everyone less prosperous.

Second, Obama's tax cut for 95 percent of America is little more than political smoke and mirrors designed to fool voters. For example, Obama conveniently hides the fact that 44 percent of Americans don't even pay a federal income tax.

You can't cut something that doesn't exist. Certainly, you can subscribe to "spreading the wealth" as an economic theory. It's a free country, at least until January 2009. But it troubles me that Obama has to lie about the true nature of his plan in order to get Americans to endorse it with their vote. Obama's intellectual dishonesty should also concern the Hartford Courant.
JBC

Greenfield, MA

#18 Oct 29, 2008
We need to understand who engendered this financial crisis. Washington liberals have repeatedly amended Carter's "Community Reinvestment Act" in order to institute "affordable housing policy." No CT municipality grappling with COAH would ever endorse such a foolish policy on the federal level.

Under President Clinton, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were pushed to carry these bad loans for individuals with bad or nonexistent credit ratings.

Republican presidential nominee John McCain and President Bush repeatedly proposed reforms, but congressional Democrats blocked change at every turn. Why? The biggest recipients of Fannie Mae lobbying cash were U.S. Sens. Chris Dodd, D-Conn.; Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y.; John Kerry, D-Mass.; and Barack Obama, D-Ill. Change we can believe in? Not so much.

Finally, it is beyond me how any New Englander could support more big government under Obama, Big government not only impoverishes the citizenry, but also leads to the moral bankruptcy of our public institutions.

Every day, this newspaper publishes stories chronicling the greed and corruption destroying our state. I'm unable to see how the Courant's editorial writers miss this obvious connection.

It's time for real change -- vote McCain!
Comparison Analogy

Mansfield Center, CT

#19 Oct 29, 2008
JBC wrote:
The wife and I were riding around the Litchfield Hills last week, admiring the beauty of the foliage and the country. We saw hundreds of McCain/Palin signs on lawns all over every town we passed through.
My wife said, "looks like McCain" is going to do well in CT this election".
I pointed out to her that for every McCain sign she saw, there were twenty or more 'voters' in CT's larger cities, prepared to be driven to the voting booths next week, to vote for Obama because he is black. No other reason, except maybe; and according to reports on ACORN from across the country, probably being paid to do so.(20 to 1.)
The major problem there, aside from the numbers, is that the vast majority of these conscripted voters don't really know who or what they're voting for.
An interviewer asked dozens of these "mercenaries" in Chicago how they liked Obama's platform, and then read off everything John McCain stands for, and they all agreed it was a wonderful position!
Then they asked the same voters if they thought that Obama's choice of Sarah Palin as his running mate was a good one, and they all answered, "yes, she will do fine as VP. Good choice."!
This country is in deep trouble.
Mindless sheep....... Just see how they are trained in this video!

Another broken Promise

Mansfield Center, CT

#20 Oct 29, 2008
CNN TODAY ( http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/28/campbe... )

"You may have heard that Wednesday night Barack Obama will be on five different TV networks speaking directly to the American people.

He bought 30 minutes of airtime from the different networks, a very expensive purchase. But hey, he can afford it. Barack Obama is loaded, way more loaded than John McCain, way more loaded than any presidential candidate has ever been at this stage of the campaign.

Just to throw a number out: He has raised well over $600 million since the start of his campaign, close to what George Bush and John Kerry raised combined in 2004.

Without question, Obama has set the bar at new height with a truly staggering sum of cash. And that is why as we approach this November, it is worth reminding ourselves what Barack Obama said last November.

One year ago, he made a promise. He pledged to accept public financing and to work with the Republican nominee to ensure that they both operated within those limits"

Just like his friend Chavez? Fidel?
The History

Mansfield Center, CT

#21 Oct 29, 2008
JBC wrote:
We need to understand who engendered this financial crisis. Washington liberals have repeatedly amended Carter's "Community Reinvestment Act" in order to institute "affordable housing policy." No CT municipality grappling with COAH would ever endorse such a foolish policy on the federal level.
Under President Clinton, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were pushed to carry these bad loans for individuals with bad or nonexistent credit ratings.
Republican presidential nominee John McCain and President Bush repeatedly proposed reforms, but congressional Democrats blocked change at every turn. Why? The biggest recipients of Fannie Mae lobbying cash were U.S. Sens. Chris Dodd, D-Conn.; Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y.; John Kerry, D-Mass.; and Barack Obama, D-Ill. Change we can believe in? Not so much.
Finally, it is beyond me how any New Englander could support more big government under Obama, Big government not only impoverishes the citizenry, but also leads to the moral bankruptcy of our public institutions.
Every day, this newspaper publishes stories chronicling the greed and corruption destroying our state. I'm unable to see how the Courant's editorial writers miss this obvious connection.
It's time for real change -- vote McCain!
1977: Pres. Jimmy Carter signs the Community Reinvestment Act into Law. The law pressured financial institutions to extend home loans to those who would otherwise not qualify. The Premise: Home ownership would improve poor and crime-ridden communities and neighborhoods in terms of crime, investment, jobs, etc.
Results: Statistics bear out that it did not help.
How did the government get so deeply involved in the housing market? Answer: Bill Clinton wanted it that way.
1992: Republican representative Jim Leach (IO) warned of the danger that Fannie and Freddie were changing from being agencies of the public at large to money machines for the principals and the stockholding few.
1993: Clinton extensively rewrote Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's rules turning the quasi-private mortgage-funding firms into semi-nationalized monopolies dispensing cash and loans to large Democratic voting blocks and handing favors, jobs and contributions to political allies. This potent mix led inevitably to corruption and now the collapse of Freddie and Fannie.
1994: Despite warnings, Clinton unveiled his National Home-Ownership Strategy which broadened the CRA in ways congress never intended.
1995: Congress, about to change from a Democrat majority to Republican, Clinton orders Robert Rubin's Treasury Dept to rewrite the rules. Robert. Rubin's Treasury reworked rules, forcing banks to satisfy quotas for sub-prime and minority loans to get a satisfactory CRA rating. The rating was key to expansion or mergers for banks. Loans began to be made on the basis of race and little else.
Continued next post)...
The History Part two

Mansfield Center, CT

#22 Oct 29, 2008
1997 - 1999: Clinton, bypassing Republicans, enlisted Andrew Cuomo, then Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, allowing Freddie and Fannie to get into the sub-prime market in a BIG way. Led by Rep. Barney Frank and Sen. Chris Dodd, congress doubled down on the risk by easing capital limits and allowing them to hold just 2.5% of capital to back their investments vs. 10% for banks. Since they could borrow at lower rates than banks their enterprises boomed.
With incentives in place, banks poured billions in loans into poor communities, often "no doc", "no income", requiring no money down and no verification of income. Worse still was the cronyism: Fannie and Freddie became home to out-of work-politicians, mostly Clinton Democrats. 384 politicians got big campaign donations from Fannie and Freddie. Over $200 million had been spent on lobbying and political activities. During the 1990's Fannie and Freddie enjoyed a subsidy of as much as $182 Billion, moths t of it going to principals and shareholders, not poor borrowers as claimed.
Did it work? Minorities made up 49% of the 12.5 million new homeowners but many of those loans have gone bad and the minority home ownership rates are shrinking fast.
1999: New Treasury Secretary, Lawrence Summers, became alarmed at Fannie and Freddie's excesses. Congress held hearings the ensuing year but nothing was done because Fannie and Freddie had donated millions to key congressmen and radical groups, ensuring no meaningful changes would take place. "We manage our political risk with the same intensity that we manage our credit and interest rate risks," Fannie CEO Franklin Raines, a former Clinton official and current Barack Obama advisor, bragged to investors in 1999.
2000: Secretary Summers sent Undersecretary Gary Gensler to Congress seeking an end to the "special status". Democrats raised a ruckus as did Fannie and Freddie, headed by politically connected CEO's who knew how to reward and punish. "We think that the statements evidence a contempt for the nation's housing and mortgage markets" Freddie spokesperson Sharon McHale said. It was the last chance during the Clinton era for reform.
2001: Republicans try repeatedly to bring fiscal sanity to Fannie and Freddie but Democrats blocked any attempt at reform; especially Rep. Barney Frank and Sen. Chris Dodd who now run key banking committees and were huge beneficiaries of campaign contributions from the mortgage giants.
2003: Bush proposes what the NY Times called "the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago". Even after discovering a scheme by Fannie and Freddie to overstate earnings by $10.6 billion to boost their bonuses, the Democrats killed reform.(conitued...)
The History Part Three

Mansfield Center, CT

#23 Oct 29, 2008
2005: Then Fed chairman Alan Greenspan warns Congress: "We are placing the total financial system at substantial risk". Sen. McCain, with two others, sponsored a Fannie/Freddie reform bill and said, "If congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system and the economy as a whole". Sen. Harry Reid accused the GOP ;of trying to "cripple the ability of Fannie and Freddie to carry out their mission of expanding home ownership" The bill went nowhere.
2007: By now Fannie and Freddie own or guarantee over HALF of the $12 trillion US mortgage market. The mortgage giants, whose executive suites were top-heavy with former Democratic officials, had been working with Wall St. to repackage the bad loans and sell them to investors. As the housing market fell in '07, subprime mortgage portfolios suffered major losses. The crisis was on, though it was 15 years in the making.
2008: McCain has repeatedly called for reforming the behemoths, Bush urged reform 17 times. Still the media have repeated Democrats' talking points about this being a "Republican" disaster. A few Republicans are complicit but Fannie and Freddie were created by Democrats, regulated by Democrats, largely run by Democrats and protected by Democrats. That's why taxpayers are now being asked for $700 billion!!
If you doubt any of this, just click the links below and listen to your lawmakers own words. They are condemning!
&fe ature=related#
http://www.youtube.com/watch... #
http://www.youtube.com/watch... #
JBC

Greenfield, MA

#24 Oct 29, 2008
JTA wrote:
Wow, its amazing to me that the deperate McCain camp can label a "tax cut" as "redistributing wealth" and it actually resonates with you people. We've had 8 years of these crazy scare tactics and all its gotten us into is a baseless war in Iraq, the worst financial crisis our country has seen in decades and the loss of jobs to other countries.
Mostly due to liberal democrats mishandling of just about everything.

Think Carter and Clinton and you'll have the sources for most of today's problems.

Even they admit their mistakes in this crisis.

Only two people warned of the coming disaster and they were : GW Bush and John McCain.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Middlebury Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Diners: You know them, they know you (Jan '09) Apr 3 WorkAvoider 17
News Rep. Elizabeth Esty won't seek re-election amid... Apr 2 SirPrize 1
Review: Video Temptations (Apr '14) Mar 27 CD Jessica 92
News Future of Oxford post office unclear (Nov '15) Mar '18 FHAYNES 4
Wheel Easy driving school (Feb '17) Mar '18 Former Student 6
What was the the Naugatuck Valley Mall like? (Jun '13) Feb '18 Davidsimon 21
News Bus company buys Conn. driving school (Feb '09) Aug '16 karma 8

Middlebury Jobs

Personal Finance

Middlebury Mortgages