Stay out of McCain's race in Arizona

[Alfred W Hovis Jr.]

Mr. Brown should stay out of McCain's reelection fight in Arizona.  McCain, though extremely honorable with a long service to America, is as much part of the problem in this country as the progressives on the other side of the isle.  We don't need any progressive Republicans in office any more than we need progressive Democrats.

 

Senator elect Brown would do well to avoid such ties.

[Relentless_Righteous_and_Right]

Right on!

McCain - out of Scott's America!

[Barry]

Your right. Without McCain there is no McCain Feingold. He served honorably and we owe him a debt of gratitude not servitude. He helped trample free speech. Thanks to the 5 sensible judges on the Supreme Court this foolishness was upended. Say what you will about Bush (and I certainly had my gripes) he seemed to pick 2 true constitutional scholars.

To McCains credit, he has never fought for pork for AZ. He deserves respect on that one as well.

[David Gaby]

Mr. Hovis is wrong-headed and very possibly incorrect. Though I have not supported Mr. McCain on many issues he has provided leadership on many important issues, especially the need to control rampant "earmark" spending as well as keeping influence-peddlers out of our government. The direction of the country will be set by people who can work with others while enunciating strong principles, and Mr. McCain has done that. On the other had there are so-called "Conservatives" who claim to support arbitrarily chosen "principles" but have proven over time that they are only a front for the kleptocrats on Wall Street who have destroyed American industry over the last generation, and caused the present financial crisis. Senator Brown should not be afraid to support Senator McCain, if he is so inclined, to avoid the ire of these fake conservatives. They are as much of the problem as the left-wing manipulators are in the Democratic Party.

[Barry]

Wall street did not cause the melt down. Feds via fannea mae and freddie mac twisted the arm of lenders to make bad loans. Bad loans falsely inflated the market. Barney Frank should be setting in jail. What the feds were doing to the housing market they have also been doing to the health care industry and we wonder why costs skyrocket while the same nucklehead tell us they will save us from big insurance companies. This bubble will burst as well. Now their taking over the auto industry. can't wait for a Kia to cost 100K.

David Gaby said:

Mr. Hovis is wrong-headed and very possibly incorrect. Though I have not supported Mr. McCain on many issues he has provided leadership on many important issues, especially the need to control rampant "earmark" spending as well as keeping influence-peddlers out of our government. The direction of the country will be set by people who can work with others while enunciating strong principles, and Mr. McCain has done that. On the other had there are so-called "Conservatives" who claim to support arbitrarily chosen "principles" but have proven over time that they are only a front for the kleptocrats on Wall Street who have destroyed American industry over the last generation, and caused the present financial crisis. Senator Brown should not be afraid to support Senator McCain, if he is so inclined, to avoid the ire of these fake conservatives. They are as much of the problem as the left-wing manipulators are in the Democratic Party.

[Barry]

And one man's influence peddling is another man's free speech. The problem isn't influence, it's the fact that we have veered away from our founder's principles regarding the spending of the people money. We have disregarded the constitution and lost out way. Return to it's guiding principles, return to the gold standard, and the ship would be "righted".

Barry Hawkins said:

Wall street did not cause the melt down. Feds via fannea mae and freddie mac twisted the arm of lenders to make bad loans. Bad loans falsely inflated the market. Barney Frank should be setting in jail. What the feds were doing to the housing market they have also been doing to the health care industry and we wonder why costs skyrocket while the same nucklehead tell us they will save us from big insurance companies. This bubble will burst as well. Now their taking over the auto industry. can't wait for a Kia to cost 100K.

David Gaby said:

Mr. Hovis is wrong-headed and very possibly incorrect. Though I have not supported Mr. McCain on many issues he has provided leadership on many important issues, especially the need to control rampant "earmark" spending as well as keeping influence-peddlers out of our government. The direction of the country will be set by people who can work with others while enunciating strong principles, and Mr. McCain has done that. On the other had there are so-called "Conservatives" who claim to support arbitrarily chosen "principles" but have proven over time that they are only a front for the kleptocrats on Wall Street who have destroyed American industry over the last generation, and caused the present financial crisis. Senator Brown should not be afraid to support Senator McCain, if he is so inclined, to avoid the ire of these fake conservatives. They are as much of the problem as the left-wing manipulators are in the Democratic Party.

[David Gaby]

As a real estate person since 1976 I actually know about this, and you are outright wrong about the Feds and the CRA (Community Investment Act) impact causing the crisis. This is a cover story. People should try to avoid assuming that things that people on the radio tell them are always the truth. Some of these people are being paid to peddle propaganda to allow their sponsors to continue to get away with things they should never have been allowed to do.

What I saw as a real estate broker was that banking regulations were very restrictive on loans to lower-income communities, to the point where people in these communities effectively, through their savings accounts, owned the net equity of institutions that were financing other people's home mortgages, etc., in more prosperous areas. The CRA was adopted to insure that people got a fair shake. It did not require lenders to allow falsification of mortgage applications or total abandonment of traditional underwriting standards.

What then happened, with "Deregulation", so strongly advocated by false "Conservatives" financed by Wall Street interests, was that brokerage houses were allowed to invest in mortgages, with ever more relaxed oversight, and to assure everyone that this was "Risk free" based on insurance schemes and rating systems that everyone on Wall Street made billions on. These are the securities whose value has now collapsed. This would not have happened if prudent lenders were making loans to people using traditional underwriting standards under CRA. It could only happen under then kind of deregulation advocated by greedy Wall Street managers interested only in short term profits, confident that any risk would be bourne by the U.S. taxpayers. This is not just an opinion I got from some radio disk jockeys; I can see this on my street and with my clients I have known for decades.

So freedom of speech is now the same as influence peddling. I am not sure about that. I think anyone should have freedom to finance speech, PROVIDED, that they do it in their own name. I think the founding fathers had commercial interests to deal with, but the amount of trickery that goes on in these days, we need some new standards. With people talking about "Freedom" when they mean they want a special deal, and talking about how "Conservative" they are when they advocate for radical changes that will enrich them at the expense of the middle class, there should be full, real-time disclosure of sponsorship of all speech.

Barry Hawkins said:

And one man's influence peddling is another man's free speech. The problem isn't influence, it's the fact that we have veered away from our founder's principles regarding the spending of the people money. We have disregarded the constitution and lost out way. Return to it's guiding principles, return to the gold standard, and the ship would be "righted".

Barry Hawkins said:

Wall street did not cause the melt down. Feds via fannea mae and freddie mac twisted the arm of lenders to make bad loans. Bad loans falsely inflated the market. Barney Frank should be setting in jail. What the feds were doing to the housing market they have also been doing to the health care industry and we wonder why costs skyrocket while the same nucklehead tell us they will save us from big insurance companies. This bubble will burst as well. Now their taking over the auto industry. can't wait for a Kia to cost 100K.

David Gaby said:

Mr. Hovis is wrong-headed and very possibly incorrect. Though I have not supported Mr. McCain on many issues he has provided leadership on many important issues, especially the need to control rampant "earmark" spending as well as keeping influence-peddlers out of our government. The direction of the country will be set by people who can work with others while enunciating strong principles, and Mr. McCain has done that. On the other had there are so-called "Conservatives" who claim to support arbitrarily chosen "principles" but have proven over time that they are only a front for the kleptocrats on Wall Street who have destroyed American industry over the last generation, and caused the present financial crisis. Senator Brown should not be afraid to support Senator McCain, if he is so inclined, to avoid the ire of these fake conservatives. They are as much of the problem as the left-wing manipulators are in the Democratic Party.

[Barry]

Influence peddling for some is the people collectively lobbying to others. It's not just "wall street" who does this. The worst impact on our national debt does not come from business influence, it comes from entitlement spending. This is brought about by "influence peddling" by non business special interest groups offering that same lucre to men (and women) who don't care the constitional limits of government in the affairs of of its citizenry. Oh, and there was a reason banks had very restrictive leanding policies in low income areas "Low incomes". And if you own stock you ARE wall street. Wall street is an exchange. I do agree on open disclosure of where money comes from. As far as influence peddling, you cannot give what another refuses to take. The problem is not the one offering the money. The problem is the one receiving it. Honorable men and women, like Matt Salmon or AZ and others, will term limit themselves thus reducing the temptation to bite the apple of influence peddling.

David Gaby said:

As a real estate person since 1976 I actually know about this, and you are outright wrong about the Feds and the CRA (Community Investment Act) impact causing the crisis. This is a cover story. People should try to avoid assuming that things that people on the radio tell them are always the truth. Some of these people are being paid to peddle propaganda to allow their sponsors to continue to get away with things they should never have been allowed to do.

What I saw as a real estate broker was that banking regulations were very restrictive on loans to lower-income communities, to the point where people in these communities effectively, through their savings accounts, owned the net equity of institutions that were financing other people's home mortgages, etc., in more prosperous areas. The CRA was adopted to insure that people got a fair shake. It did not require lenders to allow falsification of mortgage applications or total abandonment of traditional underwriting standards.

What then happened, with "Deregulation", so strongly advocated by false "Conservatives" financed by Wall Street interests, was that brokerage houses were allowed to invest in mortgages, with ever more relaxed oversight, and to assure everyone that this was "Risk free" based on insurance schemes and rating systems that everyone on Wall Street made billions on. These are the securities whose value has now collapsed. This would not have happened if prudent lenders were making loans to people using traditional underwriting standards under CRA. It could only happen under then kind of deregulation advocated by greedy Wall Street managers interested only in short term profits, confident that any risk would be bourne by the U.S. taxpayers. This is not just an opinion I got from some radio disk jockeys; I can see this on my street and with my clients I have known for decades.

So freedom of speech is now the same as influence peddling. I am not sure about that. I think anyone should have freedom to finance speech, PROVIDED, that they do it in their own name. I think the founding fathers had commercial interests to deal with, but the amount of trickery that goes on in these days, we need some new standards. With people talking about "Freedom" when they mean they want a special deal, and talking about how "Conservative" they are when they advocate for radical changes that will enrich them at the expense of the middle class, there should be full, real-time disclosure of sponsorship of all speech.

Barry Hawkins said:

And one man's influence peddling is another man's free speech. The problem isn't influence, it's the fact that we have veered away from our founder's principles regarding the spending of the people money. We have disregarded the constitution and lost out way. Return to it's guiding principles, return to the gold standard, and the ship would be "righted".

Barry Hawkins said:

Wall street did not cause the melt down. Feds via fannea mae and freddie mac twisted the arm of lenders to make bad loans. Bad loans falsely inflated the market. Barney Frank should be setting in jail. What the feds were doing to the housing market they have also been doing to the health care industry and we wonder why costs skyrocket while the same nucklehead tell us they will save us from big insurance companies. This bubble will burst as well. Now their taking over the auto industry. can't wait for a Kia to cost 100K.

David Gaby said:

Mr. Hovis is wrong-headed and very possibly incorrect. Though I have not supported Mr. McCain on many issues he has provided leadership on many important issues, especially the need to control rampant "earmark" spending as well as keeping influence-peddlers out of our government. The direction of the country will be set by people who can work with others while enunciating strong principles, and Mr. McCain has done that. On the other had there are so-called "Conservatives" who claim to support arbitrarily chosen "principles" but have proven over time that they are only a front for the kleptocrats on Wall Street who have destroyed American industry over the last generation, and caused the present financial crisis. Senator Brown should not be afraid to support Senator McCain, if he is so inclined, to avoid the ire of these fake conservatives. They are as much of the problem as the left-wing manipulators are in the Democratic Party.

[camara karamoko ibrahim]

have nice week end Scott your history begin now

[David Gaby]

Barry Hawkins said:

Influence peddling for some is the people collectively lobbying to others. It's not just "wall street" who does this. The worst impact on our national debt does not come from business influence, it comes from entitlement spending. This is brought about by "influence peddling" by non business special interest groups offering that same lucre to men (and women) who don't care the constitional limits of government in the affairs of of its citizenry. Oh, and there was a reason banks had very restrictive leanding policies in low income areas "Low incomes". And if you own stock you ARE wall street. Wall street is an exchange. I do agree on open disclosure of where money comes from. As far as influence peddling, you cannot give what another refuses to take. The problem is not the one offering the money. The problem is the one receiving it. Honorable men and women, like Matt Salmon or AZ and others, will term limit themselves thus reducing the temptation to bite the apple of influence peddling.

David Gaby said:

As a real estate person since 1976 I actually know about this, and you are outright wrong about the Feds and the CRA (Community Investment Act) impact causing the crisis. This is a cover story. People should try to avoid assuming that things that people on the radio tell them are always the truth. Some of these people are being paid to peddle propaganda to allow their sponsors to continue to get away with things they should never have been allowed to do.

What I saw as a real estate broker was that banking regulations were very restrictive on loans to lower-income communities, to the point where people in these communities effectively, through their savings accounts, owned the net equity of institutions that were financing other people's home mortgages, etc., in more prosperous areas. The CRA was adopted to insure that people got a fair shake. It did not require lenders to allow falsification of mortgage applications or total abandonment of traditional underwriting standards.

What then happened, with "Deregulation", so strongly advocated by false "Conservatives" financed by Wall Street interests, was that brokerage houses were allowed to invest in mortgages, with ever more relaxed oversight, and to assure everyone that this was "Risk free" based on insurance schemes and rating systems that everyone on Wall Street made billions on. These are the securities whose value has now collapsed. This would not have happened if prudent lenders were making loans to people using traditional underwriting standards under CRA. It could only happen under then kind of deregulation advocated by greedy Wall Street managers interested only in short term profits, confident that any risk would be bourne by the U.S. taxpayers. This is not just an opinion I got from some radio disk jockeys; I can see this on my street and with my clients I have known for decades.

So freedom of speech is now the same as influence peddling. I am not sure about that. I think anyone should have freedom to finance speech, PROVIDED, that they do it in their own name. I think the founding fathers had commercial interests to deal with, but the amount of trickery that goes on in these days, we need some new standards. With people talking about "Freedom" when they mean they want a special deal, and talking about how "Conservative" they are when they advocate for radical changes that will enrich them at the expense of the middle class, there should be full, real-time disclosure of sponsorship of all speech.

Barry Hawkins said:

And one man's influence peddling is another man's free speech. The problem isn't influence, it's the fact that we have veered away from our founder's principles regarding the spending of the people money. We have disregarded the constitution and lost out way. Return to it's guiding principles, return to the gold standard, and the ship would be "righted".

Barry Hawkins said:

Wall street did not cause the melt down. Feds via fannea mae and freddie mac twisted the arm of lenders to make bad loans. Bad loans falsely inflated the market. Barney Frank should be setting in jail. What the feds were doing to the housing market they have also been doing to the health care industry and we wonder why costs skyrocket while the same nucklehead tell us they will save us from big insurance companies. This bubble will burst as well. Now their taking over the auto industry. can't wait for a Kia to cost 100K.

David Gaby said:

Mr. Hovis is wrong-headed and very possibly incorrect. Though I have not supported Mr. McCain on many issues he has provided leadership on many important issues, especially the need to control rampant "earmark" spending as well as keeping influence-peddlers out of our government. The direction of the country will be set by people who can work with others while enunciating strong principles, and Mr. McCain has done that. On the other had there are so-called "Conservatives" who claim to support arbitrarily chosen "principles" but have proven over time that they are only a front for the kleptocrats on Wall Street who have destroyed American industry over the last generation, and caused the present financial crisis. Senator Brown should not be afraid to support Senator McCain, if he is so inclined, to avoid the ire of these fake conservatives. They are as much of the problem as the left-wing manipulators are in the Democratic Party.

[David Gaby]

I agree that the worst damage is done by the lobbying interests for increased "Entitlement" expenditures, though the damage by Wall Street interests to the American economy are perhaps comparable. Both are horrible and risk undermining the future of the country.

On one side there are people who lobby for increased "benefits" for large groups of the population, purportedly to "Provide for the needy", while in reality directly benefitting themselves while often not really helping "The Poor", or whoever they are supposed to be helping because the "Beneficiaries" are too often disempowered and made subservient to the "Helpers". Just ask anyone how much they ever enjoyed being on welfare. The bottom line is increasing cost to Government and Society without governable limits.

On the other side there are the Wall Street insiders. It was pointed out that Wall Street is just an exchange, and that anyone who owns equity in stock is part of it, which is quite true. It is also quite true, as the comic strip "Dilbert" pointed out this morning, that certain groups of insiders, notably investment bankers, have used their inside access to manipulate that exchange for their own benefit, and their promotion of reduced tax burdens on their income groups, huge government deficits from the 1980s on, comparable increases in private debt levels relative to GDP and family incomes, deregulation of all their activities, higher compensation for themselves, systematic disinvestment in actual productive industry all over the U.S. to provide for increased profit opportunities for their firms, and insistence on government bailouts of their firms that are 'Too big to fail' runs similar risk of overwhelming us with debt.

The common denominator with both these groups is that a small number of insiders have manipulated larger groups to think that their interests are similar, when they are not. The prosperity of the government-funded social service sector does not mean prosperity in the ghettos of America, nor do high bonuses for investment bankers translate into increased equity for people on Main Street who own stock.

We should agree that transparency is paramount in both expenditures of public funds and in resources used to influence policy, and then perhaps we should ask both Senator Brown and Senator McCain, as well as President Obama, to support an effort like the one that Sen. Gregg and others attempted this past week, to create a binding process where the government can get control of these runaway inflation of our debt levels and provide incentives to recover a productive role for the country before it cannot be done.

[Barry]

Firstly I actually agree with most of your commentary. However you seem to support the government determining investment banker (thus no doubt others) compensations. Where pray tell is this in the constitution. Please understand David (if I may) I am a deeply compassionate person who give of their time and resourse beyond that of the average american to address the needs of others and I hold disdain for the selfishness that often accompanies those holding powerful positions in business, "your Wall Street," yet I am supremely confident that our founders, who risked life and treasure to establish a more perfect union, would be stunned that we would allow goverment to dictate nearly every aspect of our lives in order to bring fairness. The only fainess governments have ever provided are equally dispensed misery. John Adam wrote "We have no government armed with the power capable of contending with human passions, unbridled by morality and true religion. Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." The point being that government cannot produce the conduct respecting of others, it must come from within. There will always be abuse. If from corporations, it can be confronted in the marketplace. If from government the citizenry is usually left few and very unpleasant options.

Despite your assumption that I gain my information from DJ's and the like I have enjoyed our exchange be must be on to other things. All the best to you.


David Gaby said:

I agree that the worst damage is done by the lobbying interests for increased "Entitlement" expenditures, though the damage by Wall Street interests to the American economy are perhaps comparable. Both are horrible and risk undermining the future of the country.

On one side there are people who lobby for increased "benefits" for large groups of the population, purportedly to "Provide for the needy", while in reality directly benefitting themselves while often not really helping "The Poor", or whoever they are supposed to be helping because the "Beneficiaries" are too often disempowered and made subservient to the "Helpers". Just ask anyone how much they ever enjoyed being on welfare. The bottom line is increasing cost to Government and Society without governable limits.

On the other side there are the Wall Street insiders. It was pointed out that Wall Street is just an exchange, and that anyone who owns equity in stock is part of it, which is quite true. It is also quite true, as the comic strip "Dilbert" pointed out this morning, that certain groups of insiders, notably investment bankers, have used their inside access to manipulate that exchange for their own benefit, and their promotion of reduced tax burdens on their income groups, huge government deficits from the 1980s on, comparable increases in private debt levels relative to GDP and family incomes, deregulation of all their activities, higher compensation for themselves, systematic disinvestment in actual productive industry all over the U.S. to provide for increased profit opportunities for their firms, and insistence on government bailouts of their firms that are 'Too big to fail' runs similar risk of overwhelming us with debt.

The common denominator with both these groups is that a small number of insiders have manipulated larger groups to think that their interests are similar, when they are not. The prosperity of the government-funded social service sector does not mean prosperity in the ghettos of America, nor do high bonuses for investment bankers translate into increased equity for people on Main Street who own stock.

We should agree that transparency is paramount in both expenditures of public funds and in resources used to influence policy, and then perhaps we should ask both Senator Brown and Senator McCain, as well as President Obama, to support an effort like the one that Sen. Gregg and others attempted this past week, to create a binding process where the government can get control of these runaway inflation of our debt levels and provide incentives to recover a productive role for the country before it cannot be done.

[Dan]

McCain is the one who helped Scott Brown get Elected.......McCain was instrumental in getting campaign Donations for Scott Brown.......

In addition......McCain values and track record on Pork Spending is Top Notch!.......Obama recently signed the Porkulus Bill that had almost 9000 Earmarks/Pork in it.........if McCain were Elected over Obama that would have never happened.....McCain is not perfect but he is an American Hero and has served his country on many fronts...his service in the senate is commendable and I applaud Scott Brown for supporting him.........its the right thing to do........