Politics | View from the Center and Left


Previous 10 | Next 10 
From: Dale Baker3/19/2012 5:24:11 PM
of 224969
 
More chuckles from the dork:

What does Romney have against his alma mater?

For about a year now, Mitt Romney seems to have been preoccupied with the "faculty lounge" of a specific Ivy League school. The line is getting tiresome, but the former governor just can't seem to let go of it.

"My career was spent in the economy. I didn't learn about the economy just reading about it or hearing about it at the faculty lounge at Harvard or debating it in Congress."

Some of the troubles with this are obvious. Romney didn't really spend his entire career in the economy; he spent most of the last two decades either seeking government posts (political campaigns) or seeking government money (running the Olympics). He wasn't "debating it in Congress," but that's only because his congressional campaign failed when voters backed someone else.

But it's the incessant talk about Harvard's faculty lounge that seems so wildly out of place. I understand the context -- Romney understands anti-intellectualism goes a long way with Republican voters -- but this is a misguided way to connect.

First, Romney has two post-graduate degrees from Harvard, and he has three sons with post-graduate degrees from Harvard.

Second, Romney, as recently as this afternoon, pointed to members of the Harvard faculty as a major influence on his political views.

Third, many of Romney's top policy aides are either Harvard alums, Harvard professors, or both. (If he's going to talk about how awful it is to get advice from the "Harvard faculty lounge," as he has many times in reference to President Obama, it'd help if Romney weren't getting advice from the Harvard faculty lounge.)

And fourth, Romney is enjoying the generous financial support of members of the Harvard faculty lounge.

There has to be an easier way for the former Massachusetts grad and Harvard alum to pretend to be a normal person.

Share Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: Dale Baker who wrote (185577)3/19/2012 5:27:52 PM
From: Dale Baker of 224969
 
And the dumb cluck in PA (another key swing state:

"When some of the precincts come in with a 112 percent reporting you have to scratch your head and say how does that happen?" questioned Governor Corbett.

At a certain level, that may seem persuasive. If there were precincts in the Keystone State that had 112% participation, then Republicans would have a pretty strong case for new measures intended to crack down on abuses.

But here's the trouble: there are no examples of Pennsylvania precincts, at a time or in an election, coming in with 112% participation. Corbett appears to have simply made this up.

Indeed, Corbett was Pennsylvania's state Attorney General, and before that, a U.S. Attorney. If he had found evidence of such obvious fraud, he had opportunities to investigate and prosecute. That never happened, because the fraud never took place.

Share Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: Dale Baker who wrote (185578)3/19/2012 6:05:37 PM
From: T L Comiskey of 224969
 
re
Corbett was Pennsylvania's state Attorney General, and before that, a U.S. Attorney.
If he had found evidence of such obvious fraud, he had opportunities to investigate and prosecute.


Im guessing he WAS Required by Law to do so...




So..Is he admitting to...Breaking the law..


Or.....


Being....a liar...??


which..considering his job description.....


is also an offense...????




Share Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

From: T L Comiskey3/19/2012 6:07:10 PM
of 224969
 
In the news.....
..................................................................


Capital One spokesman Alec Baldwin added his voice to the political discourse this weekend,

tweeting that Senator Inhofe is an "oil whore"
who should "retire to a solar-powered gay bar."

The slur is likely a reference to Senator Inhofe's new book, The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future, and related promotional events.

In the book, Senator Inhofe maintains that only God can change the climate,
and it is pure "arrogance" for us to think otherwise.




In a discussion about "climate deniers," Baldwin added three tweets:



'Oil Whore Jim Inhofe has betrayed every man and woman who lost their livelihood on the Gulf due to BP's overwhelming negligence...'

'Is there a bigger Oil Whore alive than James Inhofe?'

'...We need to have Inhofe retire to a solar-powered gay bar.'

Share Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

From: Dale Baker3/19/2012 6:24:56 PM
of 224969
 
U.S. Made Profit on Mortgage Debt
By JEFFREY SPARSHOTT

In the latest sign of the government's gradual retreat from financial-crisis-related programs, the Treasury Department is expected to announce Monday that taxpayers reaped a $25 billion profit on mortgage bonds purchased at the height of the meltdown.

The profit is the Treasury's biggest for any program tied to the 2008-09 crisis. The government last week sold the last of the bonds, winding down Treasury's ownership of debt backed by the federally backed mortgage investors Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Treasury spent $225 billion on purchases over 16 months before it began selling the securities last year.

Officials said the effort shows the government can unwind a rescue program without roiling markets. How asset prices might respond to the eventual curtailment of government support has been a tense subject for investors in recent years.

"We said if we thought there was any stress in the market around this, we would pull back," said Mary Miller, the Treasury's assistant secretary for financial markets. "We frankly never saw that and just continued."

Even so, the announcement underlines the extent to which government support has driven the recovery of financial markets and the costs of that far-flung effort.

The Treasury's mortgage purchases were just one aspect of government support for banks, financial markets and the housing sector. The related federal takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac has cost $151 billion. Treasury's mortgage-debt program was in force at a time when the Federal Reserve was supporting that market by buying and holding hundreds of billions of dollars of mortgage debt, and boosting all financial markets by keeping short-term interest rates near zero.

The Treasury also disbursed $414.3 billion under the Troubled Asset Relief Program, which aimed to restore investor confidence in U.S. financial firms. Through Friday, the program had collected $331 billion from dividends, interest, disposals and other revenue. The Congressional Budget Office in December forecast a lifetime cost of $34 billion for TARP.

Though major aid recipients such as Citigroup Inc. C +1.31% have repaid all their loans, the government still owns majority stakes in American International Group Inc. AIG -0.82% and Ally Financial Inc., along with a minority stake in General Motors Co. GM -0.70% and investments in hundreds of smaller banks.
Criticism of TARP

Some critics charge that many programs were too generous to banks while failing to help the housing market, which remains sickly.

"Essentially, TARP successfully stabilized markets and helped prevent another Great Depression, but it failed horrifically in meeting its equally important Main Street goals—including preserving home–ownership—and institutionalized Too Big to Fail and the moral hazard that accompanies it," said Neil Barofsky, the special inspector general for TARP from 2008 until early 2011 and now a New York University law professor.

The Treasury began buying the mortgage bonds in September 2008, the month the government took over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which guaranteed the securities and used to be large buyers of them.

A broad housing bill passed by Congress that summer gave the government authority to place Fannie and Freddie under federal control and to buy the mortgage-backed securities. Weakness in the housing market and investor concerns about the financial health of Fannie and Freddie had caused "spreads" on mortgage-backed securities to widen significantly, to more than two percentage points over comparable Treasury bonds, versus about one percentage point in normal times. The spread measures the perceived riskiness of the securities relative to safer assets.
Bonds Rise in Value

The Treasury completed its mortgage-bond purchases in December 2009, accumulating as much as $191.6 billion of the debt. The government's holdings of the bonds lagged behind its spending on them because the portfolio balance falls when maturing securities pay off. Though the outlook for the housing industry remains poor, the market for the securities had improved enough by March 2011 that the department announced plans to start selling off its portfolio in $10 billion chunks over the course of a year or so.

Since then, agency mortgage-backed bonds have risen in value and spreads have narrowed. Investors have been attracted to the mortgage assets because they offer better returns than other government bonds while presenting similarly low risk, thanks to the government's backing of Fannie and Freddie. Spreads on agency mortgage-backed securities are now about 0.8 percentage point.

"Overall, the agency mortgage market has done very well, because you could pick up an incremental spread over Treasurys while having the same type of credit risk as Treasurys," said Credit Suisse analyst Mahesh Swaminathan.

Share Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

From: Dale Baker3/19/2012 6:29:25 PM
of 224969
 
Quite ironic....

washingtonpost.com 

Share Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Steve Lokness who wrote (185570)3/19/2012 7:44:26 PM
From: Mary Cluney of 224969
 
<<<I take exception to your point that this is to strengthen banks - I believe we continue to weaken them. If you have too big to fail and if you grant banks immunity, it is naive to believe they will suddenly find religion.>>>

The whole point of financial reform is to insure that we do not get caught up again in a situation where the failure of one major bank causes global financial distress or worse. Obama is not shooting from the hips and acting like a tough guy just to satisf,y his own ego. He is proceeding with an orderl,y bank reform strategy that is sustainable over the long term. He is not mixing personal morality and talking points with policy decision making.

Share Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: T L Comiskey who wrote (185580)3/19/2012 8:13:22 PM
From: koan of 224969
 
A friend came over and said he saw a bumper sticker that said: "I get my comedy from FOX and my news from comedy central."

Share Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (185583)3/19/2012 8:32:26 PM
From: Steve Lokness of 224969
 
<<<<<He is proceeding with an orderl,y bank reform strategy that is sustainable over the long term.>>>>

I hope you are right. You have a lot of faith in Obama.

I'd be happier to break them up - those that are too big to fail. I would also like to see some heat applied to those arrogant narcissistic bankers who think they are doing god's work. The tattling on GS a few days ago suggest to me that nothing has changed. It's a mind set!

Share Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: Steve Lokness who wrote (185585)3/19/2012 8:40:22 PM
From: epicure of 224969
 
We certainly agree on that.

Share Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read
Previous 10 | Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2013 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.