Wanted: A Suck It Up candidate
Update: Reader T.W. e-mails: “I wanted to commend you for your piece concerning the mortgage mess and the politicians who are offering handouts for people who made poor decisions. I live in the metro Northern VA area and purchased a home in mid-2006, just as the housing market was beginning to turn south. I have witnessed firsthand the wild speculation and building explosion that led to the drop in prices and the loss of equity. I attempted to warn friends that home prices were artificially high and that the market would be unable to sustain such levels.In response I was encouraged to go with an interest only loan by friends who claimed to be in the know. I took seriously the terms of my loan and made sure to keep myself within my financial limits. Limits that took into account not only the rates when I signed for my loan, but also taking into account what the rates might be in several years. I am not a financial wizard. I was History major in college and an enlisted Marine; I have an allergic reaction to numbers and percentages. If I could figure it out anyone can. Like you I am waiting for the other shoe to drop; and land smack on top of those of us, responsible citizens, who didn’t make uninformed decisions and think it was a good idea to take out a huge home loan when we did not have the income to match. Like you I am also waiting, most likely in vain, for politicians to reinsert a term in our national discourse that has long been out of style: responsibility.”
Update: Reader J.L. e-mails: “I read your column often and today you nailed the problem in the mortgage industry. I am a loan originator in Upstate NY and am increasingly frustrated with the lack of understanding of what has happened in the mortgage industry. For sure, there are many loan brokers and bankers who carry a share of the blame, but the biggest problem are the people who wanted to purchase a home that they really couldn’t afford and relied on creative financing. If you could see the endless amount of disclosures and paperwork that a borrower is required to sign and both the mortgage application process and at closing, it is laughable to think that, as Senator Obama suggests, these people had no understanding of what they were entering into.”
Update: Jesse Jackson continues to milk the subprime cow.
***
I need a man. A man who can say “No.” A man who rejects Big Nanny government. A man who thinks being president doesn’t mean playing Santa Claus. A man who won’t panic in the face of economic pain. A man who won’t succumb to media-driven sob stories.
A man who can look voters, the media, and the Chicken Littles in Congress in the eye and say the three words no one wants to hear in Washington: Suck. It. Up.
The Michigan primary put economics at the top of the political radar screen, and the Democrat presidential candidates have been doling out spending proposals, stimulus packages, housing market rescues, and other election-year-goodie pledges like Pez candy dispensers gone haywire. Which leading GOP candidate represents fiscal accountability and limited government? Who will take the side of responsible homeowners and responsible borrowers livid at bipartisan bailout plans for a minority of Americans who bought more house than they should have and took out unwise mortgages they knew they couldn’t repay?
I don’t want to hear Republicans recycling the Blame Predatory Lenders rhetoric of Hillary Clinton, John Edwards and Jesse Jackson. Enough with the victim card. Borrowers are not all saints. There’s nothing compassionate about taking money from prudent, frugal families and using it to aid their reckless neighbors and co-workers who moved into McMansions they couldn’t afford or went crazy tapping their home equity and now find themselves underwater.
Economist Tyler Cowen points out the problem of predatory borrowing — something you never hear politicians spotlight. He notes, “As much as 70 percent of recent early payment defaults had fraudulent misrepresentations on their original loan applications,” according to research on more than three million loans done by BasePoint Analytics. “Many of the frauds were simple rather than ingenious. In some cases, borrowers who were asked to state their incomes just lied, sometimes reporting five times actual income; other borrowers falsified income documents by using computers. Too often, mortgage originators and middlemen looked the other way rather than slowing down the process or insisting on adequate documentation of income and assets. As long as housing prices kept rising, it didn’t seem to matter.”
Message to Washington: Stop treating every defaulting borrower like Mother Teresa.
At last week’s FoxNews debate, the He-Men of the GOP field went all mealy-mouthed when asked about the signs of recession. Mitt Romney asserted our need to “stop the housing crisis.” Does he mean the government should insulate borrowers and lenders from culpability? Continue to artificially prop up housing prices? If so, why? If not, then what?
Last month, Mike Huckabee told an NPR reporter unequivocally that it “is not the purpose of government to prop people up from every poor decision they make.” Amen, Reverend Huckabee. But at the New Hampshire debate, he sheepishly avoided tough pronouncements and instead voiced support for President Bush’s Hillarycare-Lite housing bailout since it “didn’t involve tax dollars.” Yet.
Huckabee is comforting himself and his followers with semantic self-delusion. The Bush measures — including a subprime interest-rate freeze, a proposed expansion of the freeze to cover prime-rate borrowers, and a push to increase the availability of so-called jumbo mortgages and to lift the $417,000 loan cap — are the camel’s nose under the tent. Eventually, responsible taxpayers will pay.
As for “Straight Talk” Senator John McCain, he immediately pitched federal education and job-training programs for laid-off workers. “We need to go to the community colleges and design education and training programs so that these workers get a second chance. That’s our obligation as a nation.” It is? This is conservative? This is the alternative to Clintoncare? No, this is Clintoncare. Why can’t Americans be expected to pay for their own schooling and retraining?
Fred Thompson, supposedly the conservative’s conservative, asserted the need for a fiscal stimulus: “I think that has to be considered somewhere along the line if the economy calls for it.”
McCain and Romney want expansion of the Federal Housing Administration to allow borrowers to refinance — on the backs of taxpayers. Rudy Giuliani wants government aid for borrowers who were “cheated.” No word on what he would do to borrowers who did the cheating. (Summary of candidates’ positions on the mortgage bailout here.)
As we head toward Super Tuesday, the subprime mess and the economy will dominate — and the Do Something Democrat candidates will turn their spigot of overextended-homeowner sob stories on full blast. Do Republicans want a clear alternative to liberal-nomics? Or will you settle for a lip-service conservative who will reward fiscal recklessness with only slightly less government intervention than the Dems?
I’m still looking for Mr. Right. Remember: You’ll have me at “Suck. It. Up.”
***
A reader reminds me of the famous floor speech of Col. David Crockett, who served as a US congressman from Tennessee, “Not Yours To Give:”
One day in the House of Representatives, a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in its support. The Speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose:
“Mr. Speaker–I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the sufferings of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him.
Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity. Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much money of our own as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week’s pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks.”
He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, no doubt, it would, but for that speech, it received but few votes, and, of course, was lost.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- The Al Qaeda-Toronto-GaTech Express « Obi’s Sister
- Digital Irony
- Michelle Malkin needs a man
- Maggie's Farm
- Michelle Malkin Needs “The Doctor” « THINKfuture: News, Politics And Libertarian Rants with Chris Future
- Wanted: Suck it up candidate - Michelle Malkin « Kevin’s Korner
- Holy Moly!! « Liberty Forged
- Michelle Malkin’s quest for a sucky candidate « The sound of my own voice
- This ain’t Hell, but you can see it from here » Republicans v. Democrats on the economy
- silent E speaks - Conservatively Speaking from Western Waukesha County » Yeah!!! What SHE said…
- Jon Swift
- Random-American - News Analysis and the Rantings of an Ordinary Citizen » Bubbles, financial ‘crisis,’ and government intervention
- The Whole Bird
- wash interior
- OBAMA: NOT MESSIAH, BUT GOOD ENOUGH FOR THE BLOGGERS |
- Michelle Malkin » Newsflash: John McCain says something I can cheer
- Michelle Malkin » Fiscal conservative hero: Sen. Bunning asks the right questions about the housing boondoggle
Me, too, Michelle.
Unfortunately the last guy who fit your description was Ronald Reagan.
I’m not very optimistic about our chances here.
Unfortunately, all we have right now is a lot of sucking up on the part of the candidates.
Sounds like you will be supporting Ron Paul.
How about a man who will say “I will make English the official language”
Just, agree. Where’s Jimmy Stewart when you need him?
You are one of the few people who are willing to stand up and say this stuff out loud. Are we really coming to this? It’s like a parent who won’t discipline his own child and let’s them act up in public. I saw a report last night on Glenn Beck that said people were actually vandalizing the homes that they couldnt afford so the banks were left with an even more deppreciated home. Very sad. American’s not only don’t understand finances, they obviously don’t understand basic economics. I am embarrassed for my country right now.
Not to be contentious, but Thompson’s position is pretty plain.
In a few short years—not a generation from now—a fiscal tsunami that could imperil our security and economic prosperity will hit our nation and place an unfair burden of debt on our children and grandchildren. The tens of trillions of dollars in debt that will be accumulated over the next few decades will do immense harm to our economy. This burden is now estimated at $170,000 per person and $440,000 per family. Time is running out to address this looming crisis. We need market-based approaches to reform that guarantee benefits for those who need them and embrace personal responsibility and cost-effectiveness without raising taxes. Given the scope and urgency of this problem, and the burden it will place on our children, reform is not only an economic necessity, it is a moral imperative that requires action now. I am committed to:
* Opening the government’s fiscal books on this looming crisis for all to see and understand.
* Working with individuals of all political persuasions to develop a comprehensive solution to the pending fiscal crisis.
* Leading and making the hard choices necessary, to include cutting wasteful government spending, to safeguard our security, promote our prosperity, and protect our children and grandchildren from fiscal calamity.
A bit more here.
Is he perfect? I suppose as perfect as Reagan was, he did make mistakes.
We will never get perfection, our task is to choose the the best qualified candidate for the job.
The benchmark isn’t Ronald Reagan, the benchmark is Conservatism. Of the candidates running, only Thompson and Hunter are conservatives.
Love the Davy Crockett story. I guess fiscal and financial responsibility are kind of like the Alamo, surrounded by the enemy, big spenders and socialist, but defended by so few clutching the Constitution and with stout hearts. I think we will win this new battle! Remember the Alamo II.
I agree with you, Michelle, but the reality is that few candidates will get elected on the message, “Feel your own freakin’ pain!”
No one wants to talk about Ron Paul? He is the only one who is saying the things that Michelle says need to be said…and he get’s called a nut?
Can it be that we can’t handle the truth?
Suck. It. Up. ranks as annoying as “on the front burner today”…. Where DO you get these catchphrases from Michelle?
Let’s face it - there will sadly never be another Ronald Reagan… God bless him.
Perhaps the days of small government Republicanism are long gone?
/Unless you vote for Ron Paul
I wish you Ron Paulbots would get original. We can’t handle the truth. He’s the only true conservative. He’s our only hope. Not only are your words not original, but the tacky way in which you rabidly support your candidate is annoying. It’s tired. It’s old. It’s pathetic, as well.
No one else, even the Obama supporters, are ramming their candidate down people’s throats.
I know that I am going to get alot of people angry but Big Arnie is the man. He would be a great president.
For Heavens sake BOB.
Paul believes that the We The People brought 9/11 upon ourselves.
He is an eclectic mix of liberal, isolationist and anarchist, with a smidgen of herb added, just for flavor.
All one has to do is look at the crowd he attracts. He is a nut.
You’re not kidding. Last night’s debate was an infomercial on how the candidates want to tack everyone’s (except the rich!)personal bills on to the national debt.
All three candidates mentioned that “health care is the leading cause of bankruptcy in America.”
How much do you want to bet the real cause of bankruptcy in America is “not budgeting for buying health care insurance before a catasrophy arises?”
Ron Paul is a moonbat….Period!
Michelle, I have no idea why you are so dismissive of Fred!
You take issue with Thompson’s response during the debate that suggested that we might need a stimulus package. But a stimulus package can take various forms.
I would argue that President Bush’s tax cut packages were a stimulus. Surely you aren’t against lower taxes.
If you rely on the Democrats or quasi Republican presidential candidates other than Fred! to define stimulus package than you would have a valid point. It would be like Romney proposing to dish Michigan $20B here and Billary dishing $80B there or Obami $100B over there.
But a tax cut or tax rebate are very much a form of stimulus package and very much in line with conservative principles.
I’m not supporting Ron Paul, just don’t see how he can be ignored if “smaller government” is what’s desired. I think he want’s no government.
Duncan Hunter ‘08.
He is not on anyone’s radar. He is the candidate you all are calling for, scratch that, pleading for and he is constantly overlooked.
The election for Republicans is shaping up to be anybody but Hillary or anybody but a Dem… be careful for what you wish for, you just might get a McCain, Huckabee or Paul. RINOs. I want a REPUBLICAN to win in ‘08 just as much as the next conservative but the Dems have us on our heels, while they are strategizing we are throwing our hands up in disgust. I’ll concede that our standards are much higher; however, we don’t have a plan. Republican candidates can serve the Dems their heads on a platter for their stances on taxes, WoT, Immigration, etc… but no one, not a one has capitalized on it.
I won’t sit here and complain about a conservatives’ conservative while Duncan Hunter is still in the race. He is the epitome. I won’t complain about needing a Reagan while he is still in the race… And neither should you.
IMHO, of course.
Duncan Hunter.
Maybe people would support RonPaul more if he weren’t saying, “Suck. It. Up. Or the New World Order and the darkies will take over to prepare the way for our alien overlords arriving from the planet Joooo.”
How fast you forget Reagan’s S&L Bailout. You should remember, we are still paying for it.
Stop with Ron Paul already! He IS a nut and a kook. That’s why he can get away with saying anything he wants. Whether or not he means it doesn’t matter. Sure we like some of what he says but again, he can get away with it because nobody takes him seriously. It’s the other preposterous things that come out of his mouth that prove how looney he is.
He wouldn’t even get 20% of the vote in a national election. A write in candidate would get more votes because Republicans would break off and form a new third party so get him out of this race!
Remember even a broken clock is right twice a day.
I think Ron Paul would have more support if he were on the Democratic ticket… Oh wait. Dems couldn’t support a candidate who’s for smaller government. Maybe, just maybe, he would get more support if he weren’t a nutjob. The idea that we brought 9/11 on ourselves, the fact that he is a holocaust denier and wants to disband the military… And is running on the Republican ticket!?!? That alone should tell you that he isn’t dealing with a full deck.
We are letting the msm tell us who our candidate is. Hunter/Thompson get no good coverage.
That is the anarchist in him shining through. Perhaps he shouldn’t be ignored, public ridicule would make him and his fellow travelers go away. which is what normal people want anyway.
I fear that there is no electable man nor woman in the US that would meet your critteria - not because they don’t exist but because the electorate is too splintered into issue voting cliques to seriously consider them.
Earmarks are bad in your district but OK in mine if it gets me a job.
If Fred deserves to be lumped into this, please add a specific Nanny-like proposal he is pushing. I haven’t heard him propose anything other than tax and spending cuts.
twiggman, you are absolutely right. And Hunter gets zero coverage. I’m not surprised by MSMHe doesn’t have the opportunities to participate in the debates. It’s disgusting that we complain about not having a candidate when there is one right under our noses. If only we would reach out to him.
Oprah Winfrey supports Obama and there is wall-to-wall coverage. Brig. Gen. Chuck Yeager supports Hunter, crickets chirping.
Neal Boortz is giving Michelle big time kudos for her excellent writing this week. Michelle is once again saying what a whole lot of us are thinking.
I found this interesting:
“… looked the other way rather than slowing down the process or insisting on adequate documentation of income and assets. As long as housing prices kept rising, it didn’t seem to matter.”
Replace “housing prices” with “stock prices” and you have a nearly perfect description of how the SEC handled the tech bubble of the late 90’s.
Perhaps we should offer W and the Republican Congress a thank you for not trying to bail out tech investors and tech firm employees.
(Sorry, the whole candidate-plugging thing was getting tiresome.)
Amen, CS. Amen.
the real tragedy about Ron Paul’s candidacy, as well as all of the dems, is that it’s clear the American people are more interested in hearing people bitch about the problem, than come up with *practical* solutions to fixing them. note the **. Paul has not one practical solution, neither does Obama, Edwards, or Clinton. but all of the bitching sounds great!! solutions are like kryptonite, because they require actually taking a stand and some responsibility.
as long as you can complain about what someone else is doing, then you can get away with not doing anything yourself (and all of the flowery rhetoric that comes with) - introducing the new American politician.
What’s really sickening is the people getting sucked into Hillary, Obama, Huchabee and McCain…. barf.
As far as I’m concerned, Fred Thompson is the ONLY candidate I’ll vote for.
I think your man is Duncan Hunter. He won’t win, but he says what needs to be said, and not what people want to hear. That’s why he won’t win - he’s not playing politics.
Not too many years ago if you didn’t have a 20% downpayment, you had to pledge your first child as collateral. What happened to sensible banking? GREED!! Yes, I agree with everything that Michelle says, but we definitely do need changes to the lending regs first and foremost.
Now, what to do with the current mess? What is happening here is that if nothing is done, we’re all going to be penalized anyhow. Anyone look at the stock market recently? I wish I knew the answer. Handing everyone cash to do it again makes no sense, but how do we stop this craziness?
Amazing isn’t it aj. Where have all the sane people gone?
Dont ask me I live in Nutville USA.
30…Great story, that is the first time I heard or saw that- thanks. Something ironic my son (14) is reading the book YEAGER right now. Sorry I got off topic.
In the interest of making sure no one was discriminated against in getting a loan, the federal government required lenders to take questionable loans. To do otherwise was discriminating based on race or economic status. We can’t have that can we? Only the rich or intelligent can come up with 20% down, and in a soceity that insist all are equal, expecting these attributes from someone asking for a load is discriminatory…and not allowed.
#10-
Of course his deranged brownshirt paultards have no rational response, other than to attack the messengers. Makes me understand somewhat how Hitler managed to con plenty of people also.
http://bidinotto.journalspace.com/entryid=656
Where is Barry Goldwater or Everett Dirksen when you need him? Our two political parties have been so busy giving this country away (since Richard Nixon) that they have very little left to give.
oops, sorry
http://bidinotto.journalspace.com/?entryid=656
Here’s the more complete version of “Not Yours To Give”:
http://www.juntosociety.com/patriotism/inytg.html
Would that we had more people like Horatio Bunce and Colonel Crockett nowadays. Instead we have spineless politicians who don’t understand and/or don’t care what our Constitution says and who are all too willing to bestow their largesse and buy votes with the taxpayer’s money. And we have too many people who think the government owes them things that they never worked for, never paid for.
None of the candidates is perfect. But “Go Fred!” I think he’s the closest to being a real conservative, and what we need to help our country live up to our time-honored and tested principles and ideals.
I don’t get it. So what if these borrowers aren’t able to make their mortgage payment for whatever the reason. They do a short-sale, or they walk away entirely and….horror of horrors….find a place to RENT, while their credit takes the 7 years to recover. So freakin’ what?? It’s not like they’ll all be joining those 200,000 vets living under the bridges of John Edwards’ mind. The notion that lives will be ruined is ludicrous. The bailout is what will lead to pain, for all of us. Let the borrowers bear the consequence, and remind them that this is not the end of the world.
aj, it’s spreading…
twiggman, I fiind this stuff on his website. http://www.gohunter08.com
I wish it was possible to clone a candidate. I’d take the business sense of Mitt, the foreign policy from Fred, Pauls ideas on taxes and personal freedom, and Rudies “in your face” attitude towards problem solving. Perhaps we could build a real conservative Republican candidate.
Also - Hunter’s commitment to boarder security.
Michelle,
Stimulus might be a tax cut.
What’s wrong with taking responsibility for your own actions?
I can compare myself to some neighbors. Put 20% down and drive a very old and very economical car. Many around me took out mortgages that provided up to 125% of what the house cost and drive the biggest SUVs you can find- Navigators, Hummers and the like. And it is the ordinary taxpayer who must bail them out??
Ron Paul is a loon!
Jesse Jackson is going to be on fox ..again… Hate to mimic Ann Coulter even though I love her…but why Jesse? give me a break with this guy, good grief. who cares what he says about anything?
Author: National Alliance to End Homelessness
* In 2006, approximately 195,827 veterans were homeless on a given night—an increase of 0.8 percent from 194,254 in 2005. More veterans experience homeless over the course of the year. We estimate that 336,627 were homeless in 2006.
* Veterans make up a disproportionate share of homeless people. They represent roughly 26 percent of homeless people, but only 11 percent of the civilian population 18 years and older. This is true despite the fact that veterans are better educated, more likely to be employed, and have a lower poverty rate than the general population.
* A number of states, including Louisiana and California, had high rates of homeless veterans. In addition, the District of Columbia had a high rate of homelessness among veterans with approximately 7.5 percent of veterans experiencing homelessness.
* We estimate that in 2005 approximately 44,000 to 64,000 veterans were chronically homeless (i.e., homeless for long periods or repeatedly and with a disability).
Supporting our troops should not end when they leave active duty!
A bit of background on the Crockett story.
A local farmer of sterling reputation handed Crockett’s backside to him before his speech.
Seems Crockett and congress thought it charitable to rebuild a town destroyed by fire.
The farmer told Crockett he would not get his vote(and many others) because of that. Crockett was humbled and vowed he would never do it again, the farmer backed Crockett and Crockett kept his word.
And now you know..the ressst..of..the story.
PHaaaul Harrrvey..goodday
Excellent column Michelle. My sentiments exactly.
Michelle,
You’re not wrong. You may be, however, impolitic. All of us have the advantage of not being in a 24/7, months-long job interview that is largely a popularity contest.
The things you are asking the GOP candidates to say are things that a sitting president should say. I don’t think that any presidential candidate should say things this bluntly, unless they’re trying to fail. I remember Reagan being interviewed about the homeless, remarking “Remember, some of these people choose to be homeless.” But he said that as President, not candidate.
All that having been said, when my wife and I were struggling to make our payments on our first house, I got a second job and my wife started making our kids’ clothes. I had $10 per week to blow on anything of my choosing. And we’re still alive, still married, and the discipline and self-respect gained in those years has paid handsomely (figuratively and literally) since.
wrcnossen,#47
Yes, we need a Fredamittaduncanrudystein.
Al Shar Pei had a prior engagement?
Wait it was Laura Ingraham regarding Jesse, but I love her also.
No thanks.
We elected that clone, twice. All we got were huge increases in government size and spending. Billions going to African thugs, Pali thugs and Euroweenies.
Yeah, we got tax cuts, to pay for all that, but we also got Kennedy’s education bill, which we will pay for with generations of snot nosed brats who have been thoroughly indoctrinated into socialist values.
I too would love to see a candidate that would suck it up and force our bloated government institutions to take a fiscal diet as well as let the credit industry take the hit they deserve for irresponsible behavior. I am very uneasy about the way the MSM sees themselves as the “kingmaker” during this election cycle by their shut out of declared candidates.
We have numerous government agencies that need to go on hiring freezes, staff reductions, and some departments that need to be eliminated completely. I am still trying to figure out why we need a federal department for education, commerce, and some of the agencies for interior. Many other agencies need to reduce their size and operate efficiently in paperless environments while streamline their processes by eliminating Congressional imposed rules and regulations. Try buying any supply or service while trying to operate under the Federal Acquisition Regulation what a freaking nightmare. I would love to see a flat or consumption tax instead of the bloated confusing system we have now enforced by the Gestapo tactics of the IRS (another agency to eliminate). The social security funding needs to be removed from the general fund (a move by the Democrats to pillage this once untouchable account) and fenced along with some very hard decisions to reduce spending before it goes broke. The enforcement of laws already on the books concerning the illegal invaders in our mist would be wonderful. Employers should be charged, fined, and in some cases jailed for their open violation of our laws. Fortify our borders creating jobs by building the fence on both borders in the same manner we built the ALCAN Highway during WWII. Start to pull some of our troops back to guard our own borders. Europe can fend for itself WWII was over 60 years ago except for a couple of strategic bases it is time to get the heck out of there. Of course most of the problems stem from our self absorbed corrupt Congress critters continuing to bribe their constituents with their own money.
Holy cow! I better quit while I am really getting into a rant sorry about that folks! Although I find being able to vent very therapeutic.
Yeah, maybe president of your thermostat
Ron Paul, of course.
You mean making Reagan liberals face the reality that astronomical spending and tax breaks are not compatible? How could you be so cruel.
Don’t know if there is much philosophical difference between borrowing from China and giving to mortgage deadbeats or borrowing from China and giving to the rich and Halliburton.
E-X-A-C-T-L-Y!
From your mouth to the GOP candidates ears!!
#6 - THANK YOU!
Just as an aside… the link from the article where one can read the candidates’ views… Fred’s view is not even stated.
…candidates’ ears!!
Forgot the apostrophe; Sorry, in a rush!
But scooter, even if those figures are true, which I doubt given the source, why is it anyones responsibility to provide for ex military.
I’m for veterans 100%. But what they did and what they do are separate issues.
They are provided with mental and physical health care. If they or their loved ones do not take advantage of that then who is to blame?
If, for whatever reason, they are “sometimes’ homeless then how is that any different than a non vet.
Do they not work? Do they not care for them selves?
I can certainly see combat vets having a hard time mentally but not everyone who served saw combat, most didn’t.
So do we the people provide for vets who volunteered, just like we do politicians whom we chose?
There is a limit to how much money can be taken for producers before they simply stop producing. That limit included veterans.
John McCain, bless him for his service and damn him for everything since, is a prime example of veterans who made their own way just as everyone else.
If, after his ordeal, he can succeed, then why should we expect less effort from the other vets?
I’ve never commented here but I read MM daily. It’s too bad she can’t find her Mr. Right but there is no perfect candidate. MM claims she wants a candidate that will say no to Nanny government, etc. That candidate is Fred Thompson. And by the way, I seriously doubt anyone else is going to jump in this race, except maybe Bloomberg and he is the poster child for the Nanny state. So MM’s search for the “perfect” candidate will have to wait. I trust the rest of us will make a thoughtful choice based on the candidates who are actually running.
Why is everyone ignoring this very big story:
While born-again and evangelical voters constituted almost 40 percent of Michigan’s total vote, they actually broke for Romney by five points, 34 to 29 percent.
I see nothing but a blurb on CNN - this was more important then the story of the independents.
What I want is a Republican who is not scared to come right out and say ALL illegals should be deported and now.
I live in the Washington suburbs and am sick of these type of stories on a daily basis:
http://www.nbc4.com/news/15061228/detail.html?dl=headlineclick
That man you need is not Ronald (amnesty) Reagan. You need Jesse (kick the UN out of the country) Helms. Jesse Helms was the last politician who had conviction and didn’t care about what people thought for his convictions. Jesse is my political hero. When he left the Senate, a huge void took his place that might never be filled.
I remember how many times Jesse was right and got all sorts of flack. I would love to be just like him. If you are looking for a man MM, I’m workin on being the best man I can be. Just call me
reporting five times actual income
reporting five times actual income.
HUH!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
They weren’t lying about a $4,000 car, they were LOANS for hundreds of thousands of dollars!
Remember the illegal immigrant that made $9.00 an hour and bought a $600,000.00 house?????
Well said, Michelle. Thank you!
Shame on you, Michelle. With enormous love included, of course.
This quote is taken totally out of context. Fred!’s comment had nothing to do with bailing out borrowers who are in default. He was merely stating that an economic stimulus package - primarily through keeping the present tax cuts - might be need at some point in the future to ‘repair’ the recession the ‘ubiquitous liberal
newstitillation media’ are insisting we’re in.Please, people, don’t allow the aforementioned ‘ultimeds’ tell us there are only four Republicans in the running. By doing so, you will be a victim of the propoganda they unabashedly spew to the ingnorant, the lazy, the fraudulent and uninformed sheeple. Think… oh, I don’t know… predatory lending ‘victims’ maybe?
Fred!’s the candidate left running who is closest to a true conservative.
The words Personal Responsibility seen to have been lost from our vocabulary. Where does it say in the constitution that everyone is Entitled to own a home? Even in Europe, a much smaller percentage of the population owns their own home. Once again, I blame the Politicians, who pushed for easier lening for their poor constituents, and also Greenspan who provided lots of money with interest rates that were too low for too long. Now Hillary and Obama want us tax payer who do have some personal responsibilty to bail these people out of their problems. GIVE ME A BREAK!!!!!
Since Michelle works in MSM sometimes, perhaps she could find out why Duncan Hunter is not ever mentioned? Does everyone have a post-it on their keyboards reminding them not to speak his name? Could his non coverage become a story in itself? I know he doesn’t have the funds but he could get some volunteers? Paul supporters flood newspaper forums and actually get together with signs on Main Street America. Hunter’s website isn’t even kept up to date.Someone over there is not doing his/her job. Some pages haven’t been updated since December.
Amen.
What we actually have now is not so much a mortgage crisis as a banking crisis. The market system has already solved the mortgage problem — the loan types that contributed to the problem in the first place have all but disappeared from the market, and they have been gone for almost a year. I should know - I run a branch for a very large national lender.
By the way, Michelle, when someone uses the term “FHA loan” that does not mean that the FHA or the government in any way is actually loaning somebody money. Banks loan money. It is called an “FHA loan” because FHA/HUD set the underwriting guidelines and handles the mortgage insurance.
FHA loans are not costing the government any money, even in the mortgage insurance end of it. Statistics? For the two year period ending Nov 30 2007, only 00.32% of loans had a mortgage insurance claim that had to be paid - either had forclosed or had been so delinquent that it qualified for a claim.
The problem now is an overall liquidity issue. And No, the government should not get involved in “bailing out” anybody — the market will sort it out on its own.
One problem: Ron Paul doesn’t believe any of these things you’ve said. You may not like him, but he’s against amnesty and for border enforcement, and he’s against government bailouts. I think if he were in favor of pre-emptive warfare he’d be the hero of the Conservative Right. But he isn’t, so all of his Conservative positions on things like the income tax, immigration, government handouts, education, etc don’t matter to you.
Hi Michelle,
It definitely sounds like Duncan Hunter is your man.
Coming from the mortgage industry, I can vouch for the amount of misrepresentation taking place - that is why No Doc and Low Doc loans were called liar’s loans.
So, while I am adamently opposed to any form of bailout - maybe in this season of pandering for votes a candidate might help illuminate the “shared responsibility” angle by saying that only homeowners who can legitimately document the personal financial facts and figures on their loan applications are eligible for relief of any kind. I’m gonna bet that a large portion of those 2MM facing foreclosure will start packing their boxes and a whole bunch of people around the country will say “Yes!”
Oh BTW for the law & order crowd - falsifying information on an application is federal offense.
Yes! I agree, Dan. My wife and I are strong advocates of personal responsibilty. But, we seem to be in the minority these days.
It once seemed that the Republicans believed in personal responsibility. But, that doesn’t seem to be the case now. And, the Democrats, well….big government is their answer to everything.
Why should I be responsible, when I could have my neighbor bearing the burden for my irresponsible behavior?
Precisely. A housing bailout is inevitable, given the nature of our politicians and our politics since Franklin Roosevelt got his “New Deal” through Congress and past the Supreme Court.
Those who want the Federal government to stop playing Santa Claus will get their wish in 25-50 years, when our Rube Goldberg patchwork of entitlements and bail-outs collapses under the trillions of dollars of unfunded obligations that the American taxpayer won’t be able to make good no matter how hard the IRS squeezes.
At that point, “Suck It Up” will be remembered perhaps as a footnote in history’s narrative of the debates preceding the Second American Revolution.
But until then, the motto in Washington will be, “And the Band Played On.”
BTW, love that double-entendre language, Michelle…
When Uncle Sam jumps in to save the day, it usually creates a bigger mess with a small minority getting a bailout while the taxpayers take the hit.
The economy works best if left alone. This includes the sub-prime mess.
Healthcare is another mess where the politicians want to throw more money at paying the high cost of medical care for everyone. Maybe they should step back and figure who’s making all the money. The doctor’s says it’s not them. The insurers say it’s not them. We need to figure out a way to cut the parasites out of the process and lower health care costs rather than paying increasing amounts.
How about the high cost of gasoline. Another mess the politicians want to interfere and make a mess of. Rather than putting the burden on the car manufacturers to raise mileage, why not let the public figure out (1) if they want to pay the high cost of driving a gas guzzler, let them. (2) If they don’t like paying the price at the pump, let them buy fuel efficient vehicles. The auto industry will accomodate them if the demand is there.
What’s the point of all the above? Let market conditions run their course without government bailouts or fixes.
Sound like a Ron Paul supporter? On some things, he makes sense. It’s when he’s talking to himself and appearing as if he’s mentally ill that scares me.
Can someone give me a list of a half-dozen things that the government does well - something productive, that is?
I can’t think of much that the government does, especially the federal government, well.
Well said Mark. Lots of smart and well-informed folks on this board who should know better. Ron Paul is BY FAR the most conservative candidate in this race and might be the most conservative politician in America. Avoidance of “preemptive” or “elective” wars as a major tenant of foreign policy is a core component of traditional conservatism. Goldwater and Reagan would never have gone into Iraq. Fighting elective wars in furtherance of advancing democracy is actually very much a Democratic party notion in a historical context.
BTW 30, your passion for Rep. Hunter is admirable, but it’s far from enough that a candidate lines up perfectly with you on the issues. In order to be elected President a candidate needs to connect with voters and effectively communicate his or her message in a way that inspires the electorate and ultimately permits that candidate to lead the nation. Hunter is not a very good candidate in this regard. Guessing he drops out after SC.
Just my 2 cents worth, but I don’t think any candidate or elected official can muster the political gravitas needed to pass any kind of wholesale invalidation of personal contracts on the scale that is currently under discussion.
Not even Queen Hillary could wipe out that much personal responsibility by tampering with so many mortgage contracts. So far, we’re just seeing a lot of posturing (pandering) during the political season, with candidates on both sides not wanting to look like the bad guy.
Mark, please. Paul has stated and I quote;
Please tell me why, oh why, would 9/11 truthers, holocaust deniers, etc…flock to Ron Paul. There’s just something about him that makes him attract these folks like no other candidate.
Oh and you are right that he never said he wanted to disband the military; however, it would behoove you to take a look at the definition of isolationism, then read this - “He would support getting it out of all conflict zones that we have no legitimate business (and particularly no congressional mandate)to be in.” Namely, Iraq. So while he may not have said “I want the military disbanded” what do you think smaller govt means, exactly? Especially, when you consider the previous statement?
I don’t consider Ron Paul a viable candidate for the Presidency…
Absolutely spot on!
One thing I find curious is this. If the nanny-stater’s really believe that it is the fault of the ‘preditory’ lenders, why don’t the politicians insist that the lenders suck it up instead of us? After all if it is truly the fault of the lender, and not the borrower, then shouldn’t the lender pay the piper?
Just a thought.
Thanks for the rant. It’s alike I’m looking in a mirror.
Except perhaps Duncan Hunter?
dakine is right that he isn’t connecting with voters - not even here on this blog where daily someone says there are no conservatives running. If he doesn’t connect with conservatives his chances are nil. But please don’t don’t say something like, “well, no conservatives are running so I’ll vote for Rudy.” And he’s not some nut case. My hope is he’ll serve this country in Homeland Security perhaps.
Agreed; however, it’s difficult to connect with voters when you have a media blackout. ABC and FoxNews excluded him from the debates citing reasons that just don’t hold up under scrutiny… So, there must be a reason for it. All is fair in love and war but what kind of fairness is Hunter being given? You would be livid if Paul was excluded from a debate without probable cause.
When he was included in the debates did you hear some of the questions he was asked? If he bows out after SC. It will be unfortunate and disappointing; however, Paul will not get my vote, ever.
Strike the “a”
Ron Paul forgets we were invited by Saudi Arabia and Kuwait to bail them out when Sadaam was invading Kuwait and would have been on his way to Saudi and the other Middle East countries had we not intervened.
Guess they shouldn’t have asked for our help and when we gave it, we should have finished the job. Then we wouldn’t have had to protect our assets from Sadaam’s missiles for 10 years. I wouldn’t call it “bombing” Iraq for 10 years as Mr. Paul intimates.
Oh yeah thats right! GW for 8 years and Bill Clinton for 8 years before that has brought to where we are today.
Give me “moonbat” or a “loon” anyday!
Umm Michelle, your bias is showing again.
How the heck do you characterize the above statement as an assertion of the need for more government spending and bailouts?
He says he will consider it it, not that he will do it (unlike the others who already plan to spend money). Do you understand the meaning of “consider”? It does not mean “do”, and it can mean that such actions will be given proper thought and discarded as improper. Did you notice the IF in there Michelle? On top of the non-commital answer, Thompson makes it a conditional before its even procedds to the “consider” phrase. And thus only if it is needed will it be considered.
Furthermore if you read his policies, the stimulus he would provide would be tax cuts, the “federalist” and smaller government solution.
At least Rush Limbaugh recognizes the ONLY truly conservative person in the race: Fred Thompson.
MM, what is your issue with Thompson?
Its clear that your casting the above statement as an assertion towards a stimulus (presumed higher spending) package is spin, negative spin, Michelle, and some would even consider it a deliberate distortion (e.g. disingenuous or a lie)
So once again, we conservatives are left with the nearly inescapable conclusion that you are again showing your bias and misconstruing the Thompson position and statement, Michelle.
WHY?
Why the bias and disingenuity towards the ONLY candidate (other than Hunter) that holds positons nearly identical to ALL yours? Can you EVER post positively about Thompson without taking a swipe at him in an underhadned and usually disingenuous way?
Just saying you may want to look in the mirror, MM and see who is to blame for the ascendency of non-conservative candidates: people like you who tear down conservatives with innunendo and spin.
I hope you enjoy McCain/Huckabee - you certainly seem to being doing the hachet work for them.
to: IAMSAVED#94
re: Iraq & Desert Shield/Storm…
You have NO idea how hard it was to leave there with the job half finished! We had the phase lines drawn up, logistical plans going and were ready to turn operationally and advance to baghdad.
I and nearly every cav trooper there knew we’d have to go back sooner or later.
Shame of it is we were right. The worst shame is that the Ron Paul folks would kick this can down the road and make it far worse. They don’t realize hunting wolves is than waiting until they are at your door.
Ordinary Coloradan, let me get this straight. You think Michelle is trying to do hatchet work for McCain and/or Huckabee?
Huh?! Have you read much of her blog? She hasn’t been too easy on any candidate with McCain and Huckabee right up there with Huckabee, the other frontrunner, at the top of the list of candidacies being scrutinized.
I’m thinking she and I are holding similar views this campaign cycle - there is just no candidate that seems to have the cajones to say what needs to be said in so many areas.
Sorry….typing too fast again.
I have no love for W or Billy Jeff, but they are not mentally ill like Paul.
Ron Paul’s idiotic isolationist foreign “policy” would bankrupt this country inside of two years. The 1929 depression would be a piker in comparison.
That is if we aren’t nuked by Russia, China or one of the Islamic states first. You know, because Paul was too busy protecting the “right” to smoke dope to see the threat before it became a reality.
If there is anyone to blame for this “mess” it is the simple minded libertarians who vote for Dems or stay home to teach Republicans a lesson.
Lesson learned: Never trust a libertarian to do anything that is not in THEIR personal interest, even if it damages the rest of the country.
Pelosi and Reid send their regards.
Great article, “Not Yours To Give” by Congressman Davy Crockett….
The part I liked best; “Money(taxes) with them(congress)is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it.”
One of the best lines of the day…..
Ordinary Coloradan #97, re: Ron Paulbots and terrorism…..”They don’t realize hunting wolves is more then waiting until they are at your door.”
Barry, what I am saying is she is spinning and wrong on Fred - and what’s worse, her spin, once examined, is basically immaterial, wrong and is singleminded bias at best, lies at worst. The MSM does that often enough to conservative candiates; we don’t need an online conservative like MM spreading negative spin to tear down the few conservative candidates we have left. What ever happened to Reagan’s 11th?
I’d have no issues if MM based her attacks in facts and rationality, but her negativity on FT is as irrational as it is incessant, and as I show, its usually incorrect and unfounded. And I am coming to a regrettable conclusion, that when it comes to Fred Thompson, MM is extremely untrustworthy, and she is somehow blind to being objective and she will, perhaps inadvertently, frequently write things that are not true. As I point out, she has still not corrected her biased remarks in many places, nor has she appologized and retracted the Politico hit piece she so approvingly furthered by having it run here and on HA. Its a fundamental issue of being accountable for your words, and MM has, disappointly, not stepped up the way an honest conservative person would. That is why I call her into question here, giving her the benefit of a doubt that she may be so close to her bias that she is unaware of it. Or better, get her to publicly admit her bias and perhaps get the reason for it - I admire Michelle and she has a good reason for dislking Fred, that would carry weight with me, and I want to know what it would be. However, if shes this off balance regarding a candidate, will she go off balance on other things? One wonders.
If MM is genuinely interested in the truth, she’d apologize for the UNFOUNDED negative comments, and for publishing politico hit pieces, etc.
But she hasn’t. That means we end up abandoning issues based politics in favor of the politics of personal destruction. MM with her bias is doing more damage to the conservatives than to hollow RINO “image” guys like Hucakbee and McCain. They run on spin and swim in it. Her hatchet job on fellow conservatives is wrong, and in the end only helps the non-conservatives.
As for the “suck it up”, here is a quote from a campaign stop in SC the other day that illustrates Thompson’s candor:
Now WHY does Michelle not see that as the sort of response we need?
Its obvious that is the sort of answer she is looking for, if she’d only open her eyes and abandon whatever prejudice she is carrying against Thompson.
We can vote any “suck it up” candidate into the Presidency we want, but he won’t be worth a darn with a Pelosi/Reid Congress. As long as the liberals control Congress, they will pass and spend anything they want, overriding anything a President wants. Not only do we need a conservative President, but we have to get the liberals out of Congress. Only Congress can make laws and spend money. Presidents can only suggest, and, with help, veto.
On January 16th, 2008 at 1:53 pm, graysonret said:
We can vote any “suck it up” candidate into the Presidency we want, but he won’t be worth a darn with a Pelosi/Reid Congress. As long as the liberals control Congress, they will pass and spend anything they want, overriding anything a President wants. Not only do we need a conservative President, but we have to get the liberals out of Congress. Only Congress can make laws and spend money. Presidents can only suggest, and, with help, veto
To further your point graysonret,#104 We can ill afford a liberal rubber stamp in the White House. I like Fred but, I have asked this question before and I don’t get much of an answer. What state north of the Mason/Dixon line could Fred win as the candidate for the Presidency?
Ordinary Coloradan, I don’t dispute you much on Fred’s conservatism. I’m just not seeing much about any candidate this year that I like and can find something negative, at least in my view, to say about them all, including Fred.
Maybe it’s just me but I haven’t noticed Michelle writing anything more negative about him than the other candidates in the race this year.
Now, Michelle does have a core set of issues that appear very important to her, including illegal immigration, a prevailing topic on her blog, as well as some other issues.
She comments based on issues she holds important. But, in all fairness, she does allow supporters of Thompson, Giuliani, Huckabee, Romney, Hunter and, even, Paul to post to her comments section. Were she to have a bias against a certain candidate(s), I suspect she would limit or end that. But, she hasn’t.
As for me, I am still waiting to see for whom I will end up voting on Super Tuesday. I was leaning hard toward Fred, when he was “testing the waters” in his non-campaign campaign. But, after laboring with the wait for him to officially announce, coupled with the inclusion of the likes of Spencer Abraham in his campaign, he has started to fall far out of favor for my vote.
We have already had one President who went around saying “Suck it up,” and now we may have his wife as our next President. Maybe we can say the same thing in a different way.
Well, at least they might be able to say “Suck it up!” with a different connotation than he did, cloncon.
I beg to differ there are plenty of people out there that are electable their just not millionaire suck up’s to the washington elite and special interest group’s. They exist in the citezenship of this great nation the middle class. The guy that has had to scrimp and save and work’s hard for a living and really does know your pain.
Let me tell you if I were President (My wife say’s, now that’s a scarey thought)
any and I mean any bill that came to my desk with even the smallest of pork attached would be vetoed. I would tell congress if you want money for your district then put it in a bill by itself and my advisor’s and I will research it and I will decide wether or not to sign it. The IRS would either be abolished or drastically revamped. The border’s would be closed yesterday. NO bail out’s if you can’t be fiscaly reasponsible you don’t deserve to be bailed out. I would appeal to the American people to demand that Congress take a pay cut and the Presiden’t salary as well. The lobbyist’s and special interest would be thrown out of Washington and if nothing got done then so be it, it would’nt be my fault and I would let the American people know it. I could go on but it would take several pages and I’ll spare you the rest of my rant.
Sincerely, Blind Mule
I have been saying it for a while. All of this bailout nonsense is ultimately counter productive. The folks that pols are trying to save can’t be saved because they are in over their heads.
For this reason, there is little the government can do, and I have said as much
I agree about Thompson’s error in grabbing Spencer Abraham. I still wonder about that (but I notice that Abraham seems to have faded away).
No candidate this time is without flaws. But what worries me the most is that an underhanded JimmyCarter/BillClinton guy like Huckabee might be our candidate, or almost as bad, McCain who STILL doesn’t “get it” about illegals and the border as a matter of soverignty and security (respectively), free speech and smaller government (not to mention his falling for the anthropogenic greenhouse hoax).
What I want in a president:
Appoint proper Supremne Court Justices who will limit government powers rather than expanding them (i.e. reverse Rowe and send it back to the states, kill Kelo, etc).
agressively win the war on Islamo-fascism (includes the bor