On housing, Donilon at center of regu...

On housing, Donilon at center of regulatory fight

There are 32 comments on the Buffalo News story from Oct 9, 2010, titled On housing, Donilon at center of regulatory fight. In it, Buffalo News reports that:

Before President Barack Obama picked him to be his next national security adviser, Tom Donilon was a lobbyist for mortgage giant Fannie Mae and fought off congressional attempts to impose new regulations.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Buffalo News.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

“President DOWNGRADE..Ha Ha Ha!”

Since: Sep 09

Apopka, FL

#21 Oct 9, 2010
Fannie's increasing size and debt also worry regulators. Says one top official: "Every financial institution this leveraged has gotten into trouble. The question is not whether we should do something about Fannie and Freddie, but when."

NYU's Lawrence White argues that Fannie and Freddie no longer need a subsidy: "It's time to say,'Thanks, guys, you've done well, but now you can go home and swim like everyone else.' "

(D) Donilon tried BLOCKING this...AND Fannie Mae FAILED which cost the Tax Payer Billions and is still bleeding us!!!!!!


“President DOWNGRADE..Ha Ha Ha!”

Since: Sep 09

Apopka, FL

#22 Oct 9, 2010
Bush tried to regulate but Dems blocked

When Fannie is criticized, Raines concedes, "it's like they're attacking one of our children. We're protective to a fault of our mission."

As the Bush administration talks reform, Fannie is likely to fight back by be turning to the public and to Capitol Hill. No one is picketing over Fannie Mae's debt load or demanding that the government stop subsidizing loans for the middle class.

Many policymakers--among them Democratic Representative Paul Kanjorski of Pennsylvania--think the zeal to reform Fannie and Freddie is misguided.

"People marvel at what we've been able to do with homeownership in this country," Kanjorski says. He says he'd like to use the companies' public-private partnership as a model, say, for providing economic aid to distressed areas.

Fannie Mae couldn't agree more. Critics say that reaction--what one calls "their smugness that they're doing the Lord's work"--is typical of Fannie Mae: talking a good populist game while living like kings.


“President DOWNGRADE..Ha Ha Ha!”

Since: Sep 09

Apopka, FL

#23 Oct 9, 2010
Obama's Jimmy Carter Problem

by Samuel P. Jacobs

Once again everyone is comparing the current president to a certain former occupant. As Carter returns to the public eye, members of his administration explain what Obama should learn from his predecessor.

President Jimmy Carter is making the rounds again—part of the now yearly ritual of book publication for America’s most prolific former president. But this time, Carter has left behind the Christmas encomiums, Revolutionary-era fiction, and Middle East entanglements for a day-by-day account of his time in the West Wing. Carter’s White House Diary isn’t the only work dredging up memories of cardigans, stagflation, and endless lines at the pump. Next month, Carter’s vice president, Walter Mondale, will release his own memories between hard covers under the title, The Good Fight: A Life in Liberal Politics.

With his new book, Jimmy Carter is trying to rehabilitate the reputation of his administration. In his brisk media tour, the soon-to-be 86-year-old Carter has charmed the media with his swipes at Delaware Senate candidate Christine O’Donnell. He’s also raised hackles with his claim that he’s the best former president we’ve got out there. But beyond the headlines, Carter’s reappearance poses a particular problem for this White House, as they are forced to entertain another round of speculation over how much the troubles of the Obama administration mirror those of the last one-term Democratic president. The Wall Street Journal diagnosed the trend on Wednesday:“The Carter-Obama Comparisons Grow.”

So how accurate are those comparisons?

Veterans of the Carter administration say that the presidents shared similar profiles when running for office.

So too did both candidates carry the mantle of outsiders into Washington: Carter came to the capital with his Georgia mafia, set on returning virtue to the country; Obama arrived with an anti-establishment story of his own, one that captured his complicated roots and his courage for taking on the mighty Clintons.

“Carter and Obama did indeed come from the far fringes of the American establishment,” Carter speechwriter Jerry Doolittle says.

That both Carter and Obama were less familiar to the American public posed a similar dilemma. It allowed hopes to ride high.

“They were both elected with expectations of hope,” says Carter pollster Patrick Caddell, who has become a critic of the Obama administration.“Voters invested a very great deal in two men that they didn’t know much about. It creates a problem of disappointment, with people’s expectations so high.”

Carter was a conservative, at least compared to his party, when it came to domestic politics, but he brought a liberal approach to international affairs, focusing on human rights and avoiding the use of force, Eizenstat says. Obama has reversed this approach—more in line with the traditional liberal wing of his party on domestic affairs, while bringing a muscular, conservative approach to foreign policy, prosecuting two wars and continuing the Bush administration’s anti-terror policies.


“President DOWNGRADE..Ha Ha Ha!”

Since: Sep 09

Apopka, FL

#24 Oct 9, 2010
Obama: More Nixon Than Carter

by Melik Kaylan

Publication of Jimmy Carter’s White House Diary have pundits comparing him to Obama. But 44 is nothing like the incompetently messianic Carter—and has more in common with Tricky Dick.

No doubt the parts of President Obama's U.N. speeches in recent days will make the usual bloviators on the political right ratchet up the comparisons–always intended as derogatory–between the Obama and Carter presidencies. Even though Obama devoted at least half of his Thursday morning speech to blunt words about violence, terror, Islam, Pakistan, Iran, and the like, followed by praise of free markets and American leadership, nevertheless he did mention helping Africa and, yes, ended by talking about world peace. Any talk of solving the world's problems wholesale, especially those of the third world, is a gift to the comparison-mongers. They've had ample fresh incitement lately with the publication of President Jimmy Carter's White House Diary. Carter never misses the chance, it seems, to remind America of its moral turpitude while talking up his own joyless, grandiose do-goodery. But the Obama-Carter trope has a long pedigree, going back to the days of candidate Obama's jousts with his opponent Senator McCain, who warned that the country would get “Carter's second term” under Obama.

Let us, for argument's sake, take the comparison at face-value and examine its message and veracity.

The suggestion is that Carter's weakness was derived from his naïve idealism and messianic belief that he could change the world with good intentions, a weakness arguably connected to his particular brand of unworldly Christianity. It was generally held that Carter's worldview also included a puritanical sense of disgust over his own country's shortcomings and inequities. Hence his famous Independence Day, 1979,“malaise speech” in which he intoned drearily about “the growing doubt over the meaning of our own lives.” The combination of pessimism, Hamlet-esque agonizing, and doubt about American virtues all projected a fatal image of weakness abroad. They found an exact antidote in the character of Ronald Reagan–a sunny, optimistic extrovert with a faith in the moral strengths of the American system.

Apply this scenario to the Obama presidency and you can see where it leads. There are a few–only a few—points of similarity. President Obama is certainly trying to curb the military's expenditures—how could he not? He started out his tenure by talking directly and idealistically to the Muslim world. He has placed a great deal more emphasis on talk and diplomacy than the Bush administration did. He has put pressure on Israel to try harder with the Palestinians. On the domestic front, health-care reform furnished ample evidence, for those in search of such, of too much concern with grievances and not enough with national greatness. Above all, the president's dourness, his apparent pessimism—he would not use the word 'victory' in relation to Iraq—chimes with that of Carter. Ergo, Obama is Carter redux.

And yet it won’t hold up. On matters of substance the comparison falls apart. Unlike Carter, Obama is no outsider to the establishment bearing a grudge against the insider elites. Witness his tendency to appoint the likes of Timothy Geithner and Larry Summers to top posts around him.

The Obama era, so far, is all about repair and retrenchment. In that way, it bears a greater resemblance to the Nixon presidency than to the incompetent messianism of the Carter days which, in turn, seem more akin to the faith-based over-reaching visions of the Bush era.


Since: Jan 07

Bronx, NY

#25 Oct 9, 2010
"the Messiah"Obama is trying to dig this Financial Crisis hole even deeper. It's unbelievable.

That is the intent of his agenda. I have been reading his "Dreams from my Father" and despite the fact that it is intentionally vague, the message seems to coalesce as the book goes on. He describes the hopelessness and isolation of African-Americans on the fringe of Chicago and his efforts to form a coalition to push for reform.

He notes that African-Americans who took advantage of the doors of opportunity opened by the Civil Rights movement had abandoned their roots and basically, "sold out." This meant moving up the ladders of the professions and becoming more suburban main stream than people who were born suburbanites.

He describes the sense of hopelessness, the trashed buildings, overgrown playing fields which characterized the poor neighborhoods. He does not seem proud of those African Americans who, given the opportunity, had achieved once undreamed-of goals. In fact, this seemed to disturb him because of those who had been left behind, in the worst schools, crumbling projects and so on.

Obama wants to reverse this trend. Although the Constitution guarantees us only "the pursuit of happiness," not the fulfillment of all of our goals, he seems to believe that success, especially accompanied by significant remuneration, is undeserved as long as there are those who have not achieved their dreams. It must be punished by siphoning a government determined fund from those with earned or inherited wealth, or a combination of both. Inequity of lifestyle cannot be tolerated. If he cannot raise up the standard of living of the poor, then the only other option is to impoverish those who are not. He's doing a great job. In spite of billions in stimulus money, the poverty rate is up, people who had never received public assistance of any kind are receiving food stamps and Aid to Dependent Children. The Bush Tax Cuts will expire and anyone with a few extra dollars will be turning them over to the Obama welfare state to equalize, or standardize the American way of life at the lowest common denominator.

Seattle, WA

#26 Oct 9, 2010
just another obama hired crook - there' a definate pattern going on with this guy
thank goodness he's half way outa office!!

Remember in November

Ocala, FL

#28 Oct 9, 2010
What happened to Odummy's pledge to keep all lobbyists out of his administration?...and to assign a political operative and lobbyist to this position in National Intelligence is asking for trouble.

When Congress changes hands, if there is another attack on this Country, Odummy could well face impeachment charges.

He is surrounding himself with radicals and "yes" people.
Dr Obama

Nha Trang, Vietnam

#30 Oct 9, 2010
any one watch da Dogde ball?:)
Dr Obama

Nha Trang, Vietnam

#31 Oct 9, 2010
Cranky Old Man wrote:
Obama gives Donilon another chance to screw up. A job as national security advisor of all things.
House or Homedepot? welcom to McCan Hillton Hotel sexcure!:-000

Pasadena, CA

#33 Oct 10, 2010
Governmental policies and lack of oversight under that moron Bush destroyed the real estate market. Now the government needs to help all the homeowners who were victimized!

Since: Jan 07

United States

#34 Oct 10, 2010
"Homeowner"]Governme ntal policies and lack of oversight under that moron Bush destroyed the real estate market. Now the government needs to help all the homeowners who were victimized!

As early as 2006, Bush was blocked in his efforts to put the skids on Freddie and Fannie by such luminaries as Chris Dodd, Barney Franks and Maxine Waters. The problem lay in mortgages granted to people who could not actually afford to pay them, and myopic individuals who used their home equity to finance other things.

Thirty years ago, when I purchased my first house, I needed 20% of the market price, as well as the taxes for the months remaining in the year. My husband and I were both employed and had been for several years in the same locations. We had paid back our school loans and carried credit cards for a few local stores, owing very little. The first question the loan officer asked was if we had the 20% his bank required. When we said we did, he said, "Now we can talk."

Somewhere along the line, the requisites which guaranteed our obtaining a mortgage were loosened or waived. We are seeing the consequences today. Many other people remortgaged for their children's educations, items viewed as necessities or just plain luxuries. I have just returned from another state where the price of homes is through the roof. Modest 1950's Cape Cods are going for a quarter of a million dollars. Many homeowners have to try to sell way above the value of their homes because they have remortgaged, betting on their homes increasing, rather than decreasing in value.

I am a firm believer in Reagan's warning about the worst thing we can hear is someone saying "I am from the government and I'm here to help you." I know that many people are in desperate straits but I would take this statement as a cautionary note about government subsidies or assistance in helping people maintain their homes. I would be very careful about reading the fine print.

If the government subsidizes your home, it becomes part owner. That is the last thing I need or would want. None of us can really undo past mistakes, but introducing the government into the mix is inviting our worst nightmare in to make itself at home.

Bradenton, FL

#36 Oct 11, 2010
Same old pimps and Ho's working government for a living.......

No "CHANGE" for obama here either........

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.

Richard Shelby Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Many Christian conservatives are backing Alabam... 24 min Marcavage s Emission 1,111
News Final push for Moore and Jones in Alabama Senat... 1 hr Lawrence Wolf 10
News Trump discounts sex assault accusations against... Dec 6 Death on 2 Legs 105
News Trump all but endorses GOP's Moore despite sex ... Dec 2 Trump is a joke 204
News Trump, Republicans Send - Incredibly Dangerous ... Nov 17 Fit2Serve 26
News Chamber of Commerce steps up support of Luther ... Sep '17 Pope Ben Out To P... 2
News Republican senators reject Trump's blaming Cong... Aug '17 bottlecap 2
More from around the web