**All GOP lies mentioned below have been a prominent feature on WBSM local radio.
GOP fed media have mislead on Economic Recovery Plan ( Stimulus), devised stories about non existent earmarks and pork, and conflated the Plan with Housing Relief and TARP initiatives.
In truth the Stimulus is very simple and uncontroversial. The following are two succinct reports on the Stimulus, its basic Keynesian multiplier rationale, and the specific areas it targets:
GOP minions have also tried to bury the bill's tax cut - largest tax cut in US history - in favor of lies about marsh mice and lies about Harry Reid and rail. In fact, according to the Globe, "the signature two-year "Making Work Pay" tax break will affect 95 percent of working families, and, in six weeks' time, a typical family will start taking home at least $65 more every month."
As Frank Rich pointed out several weeks ago, this Herbert Hooverism plays well in the blogosphere but earns negative equity amongst the public at large. As David Frum admits below, the GOP is not trusted, has minus 8 years of integrity, and is deaf to the public thirst for "solutions first." Even the immediate payroll tax relief he proposes is part of Obama's plan.
Frum is engaged in true patriotism and party loyalty, not convenient dissent and blind party allegiance. Here's an example of the latter, where a SouthCoast GOPer ignores his party's foibles and paints his actions as principled and patriotic. Oh, and as befits a WBSM fan, he lies about the Stimulus by peddling a partial CBO study.
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Monday, January 19, 2009
Barry Richards lies again.
Robert Sands (sandsnb@hotmail.com)
Sent: Fri 1/16/09 12:31 PM
To: barry@wsar.com
Barry,
I am very curious as to what you are going to do when you realize that the Drudge propagated story about Obama's inaugural cost is debunked. Truth is, the cost will be comparable, if not less in adjusted dollars than Bush's party. How will you reflect on the inordinate time spent on a lie? Afterall, as you say yourself, there are serious issues going on.
Robert
New Bedford
Sent: Fri 1/16/09 12:31 PM
To: barry@wsar.com
Barry,
I am very curious as to what you are going to do when you realize that the Drudge propagated story about Obama's inaugural cost is debunked. Truth is, the cost will be comparable, if not less in adjusted dollars than Bush's party. How will you reflect on the inordinate time spent on a lie? Afterall, as you say yourself, there are serious issues going on.
Robert
New Bedford
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Sunday, January 4, 2009
Thursday, January 1, 2009
Monday, December 29, 2008
ISRAEL DESTROYS GAZA
What is happening?
November 5th, 2008 Israeli Defense Forces broke the truce with Hamas, killing 5 in an assault on a "kidnapping tunnel." Over the past three days the IAF massacre from above killing hundreds as it supposedly attacks terrorists. Israel claims the right to defend itself under Article 51 of the UN charter. But are Gazans not supposed to respond to the 40 year occupation, 4 year siege, and intermittent attacks and blockades from Israel? What can possibly result from this overwhelming assault on a defenseless people?
What will happen?
It is clear that peace is further away than ever in Palestine. How will this affect the Muslim world's approach to the West? Maybe the world's Muslims will think "there is not too much glory and valor involved in flying over a giant prison and firing at its people using helicopters and fighter jets." Maybe this and not the Koran has something to do with Islamic terror? At least that's what the 9-11 Commission said.
How did it happen?
Since the withdrawal in 2005, Israel has maintained a siege on Gaza turning on and off power at will, illegally freezing vital funds, blocking passage at Rafah and Gaza crossings in and out at will. All this as it tells the world it has withdrawn from Gaza. We are not too far from summer 2006 and the bloody assault on Gaza ( a supposed rescue mission for one soldier kidnapped in a reprisal - Gilad Shalit) that preceded the killing of 1,000 in Lebanon.
Expressing the democratic wishes of Gazans, Hamas has consistently demanded to see such restrictions lifted and seemed reluctant to renew the ceasefire without such guarantees. Despite Israeli attacks on alleged militants and seven to ten rockets fired from Gaza, by Sunday December 22nd it looked like a restoration of the truce was possible with Turkish and Egyptian mediation.
Israel had bigger plans and seemingly used the expiration of the truce as a time to implement them. Again, civilian deaths are a part of the plan or at least not considered. Even an Israeli newspaper admits that " little to no weight was apparently devoted to the question of harming innocent civilians."
However, after months of a successful truce, by now Israel is determined not to treat the democratic representatives of Palestinians as equals or treat the Palestinians as deserving of any rights or liberties. So says Israeli historian Tom Segev as he sees Israel "striking at the Palestinians to 'teach them a lesson.'
This wont work, he says. Afterall, Israel's mass killing leaves a people with nothing to lose and no way out. The real solution would have come with efforts to refine and restore the truce last week. When this mass killing is over, there will still be one alternative says Segev: "Ending the siege of Gaza and allowing freedom of movement between Gaza and the West Bank [that] could rehabilitate life in the Strip."
Samira Balousha carries her son, Muhammed, while crying over the body of her 4-year-old daughter, Jawaher, during the funeral for Jawaher and her four sisters, who died in an Israeli airstrike on the mosque next to their house in Gaza.
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Monday, October 6, 2008
WBSM Race bait amid financial scandal
"High cost to racial hyping" says WBSM host
The Lie:
1. WBSM have been peddling a youtube video that allegedly shows black Dems in 2004 preventing reform of of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
2. WBSM have claimed that "social engineering" and affirmative action have helped fuel the mortgage crisis.
3. WBSM have claimed that McCain and the GOP stepped up to save the financial system from Fan and Fred.
The Truth:
1. The 2004 video has no relation to sub prime market failure. It shows a committee hearing with Housing regulators critiquing accounting systems at Fan and Fred. Sub prime mortgages are not at issue in the '04 hearing, not a big part of Fannie and Freddie in 2004, and not even mentioned in the whole 7 hours of hearings.
2. Directing loans to minorities and the CRA has no relation to crisis.
3. Fan and Fred are a small or secondary domino of the crisis. Dems were at the forefront of reform, being the only ones to successfully pass reform acts.
The Details:
1420 White Male Angst Radio has been spending numerous hours slamming Bill Clinton's actions on Redlining and the Carter era Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) as "Social engineering" i.e. affirmative action. They forget that redlining was a real issue with real prosecutions and evidence of bias. A bigger gaffe is the assault on the Community Reinvestment Act as a sort of "social engineering" to direct loans to African Americans.
On the CRA
Truth is, the CRA doesn't even apply to the loans made and bought by the main firms in trouble on Wall St. It applies mainly to depository institutions, and is working just fine. Despite the local GOP defending the poor folks on Wall St from minorities, there is no evidence that those investing in, selling, and repacking sub prime loans were motivated in any way by fear of redlining or the non applicable CRA. There's about as much evidence for that as the Michelle Malkin race bait that illegal alien mortgages are behind the crisis ( also pushed out on WMAR).
Black, like Obama
The hosts have repeatedly played a snappily edited youtube video , which shows various African American democrats grilling investigators, as proof of Democrats blocking reform of Fannie and Freddie and hence failing to avert the current crisis. This emulates the racism of the McCain campaign ads (where Franklin Raines and Kwame KIlpatrick are linked to Obama by virtue of the fact that they are African American).
Trouble is, the House hearing being played in the clip has nothing to do with subprime mortgages. And sub prime mortgages are the root cause of the current bust. In the video an Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight report is discussed, a report that had NOTHING TO DO with sub prome mortgages. In fact
an old SEC report filing by Fannie says of the 2004/2005 period:
The video is full of other falsehoods, claiming Fan and Fred themselves made mortgages ( to minorities of course), that Franklin Raines was criminally implicated ( that's a new one). Once again, committee members are talking about an entirely different matter - accounting reform at Fan and Fred. Accordingly:
Misreading the calendar
If you understand the legislative process you would get this focus on accounting.In fact, the first clue comes shortly into the video when Chris Shays mentions that Fan Mae, Fred Mac were not subject to the accounting reform Sarbanes-Oxley act.
If you understood Wall St, you would get that Fan and Fred assumed, but did not originate, bad mortgages.
If you understood the common Gregorian calendar you would understand that 2004 is not 2005, is not 2008. Mortgage reliability was violated elsewhere and later on, and is not relevant to the video.
And yet, a quote or two from Barney Frank in '03 is supposed to seal the sub prime indictment on the Democratss? When one actually looks at the Democrat approach to reform and regulation of Fan and Fred, what do we see?
On Democrats
We see that Democrats, including those featured in the video, were strongly pro reform and eventually succeeded despite GOP opposition. That's quite a contrast to the WMAR 1420 youtube fairy tale.
Of the African Americans attacked in the youtube clip:
Arthur Davis actually voted for a successful house bill (HR 1461) to improve regulation of Fannie and Freddie in 2005.
Gregory Meeks ( also set up in the video) praised the same 2005 bill (HR 1461) as "true bipartisanship" and, like Barney Frank, regretted that the "excellent bill" had been sunk by a GOP amendment that prohibited many non profits from participation.
Maxine Waters ( selectively edited in the video) praised, in 2005, the "bipartisan support for this legislation" and was explicit in claiming that HR 1461 "was a good bill...because..it was going to bring about reform of the GSEs."
So when the Dems are actually on record discussing the actual issue, they are fully backing reform!!
On HR 1461
And guess what? HR 1461 passed the House without much trouble. The only trouble was GOP attempts to keep non profits from potential applicants for competitive housing grants ( causing Meeks, Frank and Waters to vote no).
So with praise and/or support of Democrats the bill went to the Senate , where, WBSM tells us it died in a Senate committee because of Dems. This is another lie, unfortunately. Although WBSM did merely borrow this lie from Amanda Carpenter of the Boston Herald.
On McCain
On his web blog, Ken Pittman lies by saying that McCain "introduced The Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005." Trouble is S190 ( Senate version of HR 1461) was not introduced by McCain at all -although he did sign on as a co sponsor. Senators co sponsor hundreds of bills annually.
So what did happened to CHUCK HAGEL'S bill? Well, contrary to Pittman's tale, it actually did make it out of the senate committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs -but too late for congressional action in the GOP's 109th Congress.
On GOP culpability
So why the urge to blame Dems for the "death" of this reform?
Two other developments add to the mystery:
* Ohio Republican Rep. Michael Oxley says that White House ideology scuppered the bi-partisan bill because Bush wanted to kill off Fan and Fred completely.
* Also, we have a Colorado Republican Wayne Allard writing a letter to Senate Majority leader Bill Frist in May 2006 urging that the bill be brought to the Senate floor for a vote. No response came.
Conclusion - Shelby or Frist held up the bill for the White House???
Either way, James B. Lockhart of the FHE Oversight was dismayed that the GOP senate killed the bill and appealed that it be revisited in the next Congress. And so it was, Barney Frank passed it next time round as HR 1427, co sponsored by those very Dems attacked in the video - Clay, Meeks, and Waters!!!!!!!!! ( strangely, McCain the regulator didn't sponsor this Senate version).
So why the coverup?
Why the exclusive focus on Barney Frank and Fan and Fred, when the 800 Billion bailout is actually going to Wall St players?
Why do Amanda Carpenter of the Herald and her loyal readers in the southcoast GOP claim that John Kerry, Barack Obama, Chris Dodd and Hillary Clinton were against the Hatch reform bill when it never reached the Senate in 2005/2006?
The Lie:
1. WBSM have been peddling a youtube video that allegedly shows black Dems in 2004 preventing reform of of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
2. WBSM have claimed that "social engineering" and affirmative action have helped fuel the mortgage crisis.
3. WBSM have claimed that McCain and the GOP stepped up to save the financial system from Fan and Fred.
The Truth:
1. The 2004 video has no relation to sub prime market failure. It shows a committee hearing with Housing regulators critiquing accounting systems at Fan and Fred. Sub prime mortgages are not at issue in the '04 hearing, not a big part of Fannie and Freddie in 2004, and not even mentioned in the whole 7 hours of hearings.
2. Directing loans to minorities and the CRA has no relation to crisis.
3. Fan and Fred are a small or secondary domino of the crisis. Dems were at the forefront of reform, being the only ones to successfully pass reform acts.
The Details:
1420 White Male Angst Radio has been spending numerous hours slamming Bill Clinton's actions on Redlining and the Carter era Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) as "Social engineering" i.e. affirmative action. They forget that redlining was a real issue with real prosecutions and evidence of bias. A bigger gaffe is the assault on the Community Reinvestment Act as a sort of "social engineering" to direct loans to African Americans.
On the CRA
Truth is, the CRA doesn't even apply to the loans made and bought by the main firms in trouble on Wall St. It applies mainly to depository institutions, and is working just fine. Despite the local GOP defending the poor folks on Wall St from minorities, there is no evidence that those investing in, selling, and repacking sub prime loans were motivated in any way by fear of redlining or the non applicable CRA. There's about as much evidence for that as the Michelle Malkin race bait that illegal alien mortgages are behind the crisis ( also pushed out on WMAR).
Black, like Obama
The hosts have repeatedly played a snappily edited youtube video , which shows various African American democrats grilling investigators, as proof of Democrats blocking reform of Fannie and Freddie and hence failing to avert the current crisis. This emulates the racism of the McCain campaign ads (where Franklin Raines and Kwame KIlpatrick are linked to Obama by virtue of the fact that they are African American).
Trouble is, the House hearing being played in the clip has nothing to do with subprime mortgages. And sub prime mortgages are the root cause of the current bust. In the video an Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight report is discussed, a report that had NOTHING TO DO with sub prome mortgages. In fact
an old SEC report filing by Fannie says of the 2004/2005 period:
We did not participate in large amounts of these non-traditional mortgages in 2004 and 2005.
The video is full of other falsehoods, claiming Fan and Fred themselves made mortgages ( to minorities of course), that Franklin Raines was criminally implicated ( that's a new one). Once again, committee members are talking about an entirely different matter - accounting reform at Fan and Fred. Accordingly:
Although under Raines, Fannie Mae invested in some securities backed by subprime loans, it didn't start buying subprime and Alt-A loans directly (and bundling them into securities) until late 2004 AFTER the accounting scandal.
Misreading the calendar
If you understand the legislative process you would get this focus on accounting.In fact, the first clue comes shortly into the video when Chris Shays mentions that Fan Mae, Fred Mac were not subject to the accounting reform Sarbanes-Oxley act.
If you understood Wall St, you would get that Fan and Fred assumed, but did not originate, bad mortgages.
If you understood the common Gregorian calendar you would understand that 2004 is not 2005, is not 2008. Mortgage reliability was violated elsewhere and later on, and is not relevant to the video.
And yet, a quote or two from Barney Frank in '03 is supposed to seal the sub prime indictment on the Democratss? When one actually looks at the Democrat approach to reform and regulation of Fan and Fred, what do we see?
On Democrats
We see that Democrats, including those featured in the video, were strongly pro reform and eventually succeeded despite GOP opposition. That's quite a contrast to the WMAR 1420 youtube fairy tale.
Of the African Americans attacked in the youtube clip:
Arthur Davis actually voted for a successful house bill (HR 1461) to improve regulation of Fannie and Freddie in 2005.
Gregory Meeks ( also set up in the video) praised the same 2005 bill (HR 1461) as "true bipartisanship" and, like Barney Frank, regretted that the "excellent bill" had been sunk by a GOP amendment that prohibited many non profits from participation.
Maxine Waters ( selectively edited in the video) praised, in 2005, the "bipartisan support for this legislation" and was explicit in claiming that HR 1461 "was a good bill...because..it was going to bring about reform of the GSEs."
So when the Dems are actually on record discussing the actual issue, they are fully backing reform!!
On HR 1461
And guess what? HR 1461 passed the House without much trouble. The only trouble was GOP attempts to keep non profits from potential applicants for competitive housing grants ( causing Meeks, Frank and Waters to vote no).
So with praise and/or support of Democrats the bill went to the Senate , where, WBSM tells us it died in a Senate committee because of Dems. This is another lie, unfortunately. Although WBSM did merely borrow this lie from Amanda Carpenter of the Boston Herald.
On McCain
On his web blog, Ken Pittman lies by saying that McCain "introduced The Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005." Trouble is S190 ( Senate version of HR 1461) was not introduced by McCain at all -although he did sign on as a co sponsor. Senators co sponsor hundreds of bills annually.
So what did happened to CHUCK HAGEL'S bill? Well, contrary to Pittman's tale, it actually did make it out of the senate committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs -but too late for congressional action in the GOP's 109th Congress.
On GOP culpability
So why the urge to blame Dems for the "death" of this reform?
Two other developments add to the mystery:
* Ohio Republican Rep. Michael Oxley says that White House ideology scuppered the bi-partisan bill because Bush wanted to kill off Fan and Fred completely.
* Also, we have a Colorado Republican Wayne Allard writing a letter to Senate Majority leader Bill Frist in May 2006 urging that the bill be brought to the Senate floor for a vote. No response came.
Conclusion - Shelby or Frist held up the bill for the White House???
Either way, James B. Lockhart of the FHE Oversight was dismayed that the GOP senate killed the bill and appealed that it be revisited in the next Congress. And so it was, Barney Frank passed it next time round as HR 1427, co sponsored by those very Dems attacked in the video - Clay, Meeks, and Waters!!!!!!!!! ( strangely, McCain the regulator didn't sponsor this Senate version).
So why the coverup?
Why the exclusive focus on Barney Frank and Fan and Fred, when the 800 Billion bailout is actually going to Wall St players?
Why do Amanda Carpenter of the Herald and her loyal readers in the southcoast GOP claim that John Kerry, Barack Obama, Chris Dodd and Hillary Clinton were against the Hatch reform bill when it never reached the Senate in 2005/2006?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
