Hope For An Obama Presidency

Rush Limbaugh was asked by a “major American print publication” what his “hope for the Obama Presidency” was.  Limbaugh’s response:

I disagree fervently with the people on our [Republican] side of the aisle who have caved and who say, ‘Well, I hope he succeeds.’”

So I’m thinking of replying to the guy, “Okay, I’ll send you a response, but I don’t need 400 words, I need four: I hope he fails.” (interruption) What are you laughing at? See, here’s the point. Everybody thinks it’s outrageous to say. Look, even my staff, “Oh, you can’t do that.” Why not? Why is it any different, what’s new, what is unfair about my saying I hope liberalism fails? Liberalism is our problem. Liberalism is what’s gotten us dangerously close to the precipice here. Why do I want more of it? I don’t care what the Drive-By story is. I would be honored if the Drive-By Media headlined me all day long: “Limbaugh: I Hope Obama Fails.” Somebody’s gotta say it.

 His answer was not only disappointing; I view it as unpatriotic, unimaginative, and emblematic of the failure of our current “conservative” leaders.

A couple of decades ago, a young and inexperienced African American gentleman was elected to public office on a platform that was designed to show he could stick it to the rich and powerful business interests better than anyone in previous history.   He wanted to do more than just “spread the wealth” around.  He wanted to put the “Smart-Ass White Boys” in their place.

That man was Andrew Young, and 8 years after his election, and even today, he is viewed by many as the most pro-business and successful mayor in Atlanta’s modern history.   Young received over 80% of the vote when he stood for re-election in 1985.  His transition from an anti-establishment “radical” to a best friend of the Chamber of Commerce was not a calculated political move on his part, but came about because those who he thought he wanted to fight against knew they could not afford for him to fail.

In the 80’s, Atlanta was still a company town.  The CEO’s of Coca Cola, Trust Company Bank, Delta, and others generally ran the city from the tables of the Commerce Club.   Upon Young’s election, it was the CEO of Coca Cola, Roberto Goizueta, who invited Young to have a friendly lunch in an effort to open up a dialogue.   Many more lunches followed, and were expanded to the other CEO’s of the day.  The conversion of Young didn’t happen overnight, but Goizueta was able to plant the seed that they could achieve far more working together than working against each other. 

Atlanta would not have hosted the Olympics had these CEO’s decided their hope for an Andy Young administration was failure.  Despite the fact that it was candidate Young himself who pronounced the business community an enemy, these gentlemen didn’t decide their role was to be the loyal opposition.  They knew something much more important.  You never get ahead by trying to get even.  

President Obama has already made some moves toward the economic center.   His choices for an economic team have been widely praised by those on the right.  He has even gone so far to articulate that tax increases may not be appropriate in this economic environment.    Despite this evidence that Obama may be willing to govern as a centrist, those who claimed we know nothing about this man during the campaign now seem to know everything they need to write him, and our country, off.

As a young conservative, I grew up listening to Ronald Reagan talking about America being a “shining city on a hill”.  About the hope and optimism of the American people overcoming fear.  About hard work and ingenuity of people united for a common purpose being able to tackle any problem that was put before us.  Above all, we were the party of ideas.

As such, I am embarrassed when I see someone who presents himself to be a conservative leader “hope” for failure.   It is unacceptable for those of us who believe in this country to pre-emptively raise a white flag of surrender with the only apparent motive to have the hollow pleasure of an “I told you so” should failure be achieved.   America deserves better from us.  America demands better from us.

Our citizens face immediate struggles that most have not experienced in their lifetime.   If conservatives choose to watch from the sidelines and hope for failure, then we have become as pathetic as we are irrelevant.   I, for one, am confident enough in America that I can still hope that President Obama will succeed.  I hope you are too.

HT:  John Konop/ControlCongress.com

171 comments

  1. yellowb says:

    I don’t hope he fails, I KNOW he will fail if he tries to implement a liberal agenda. He will succeed if he stays in the middle throughout his administration.

  2. So it is ‘unpatriotic, unimaginative, and emblematic of the failure of our current “conservative” leaders’ to note that:

    Of course every American wants his president to be successful on every count that will benefit the country. No true American wants to see a monumental, destructive, Carteresque failure in the White House. My liberal co-worker is correct on that count. No one wants the next Buchanan, who, Nero-like, fiddled while Washington D.C. and the country burned. We want them all to be Reagans, Washingtons and Lincolns.

    But, that is just it, isn’t it? We want them to do what is best for the country. That is what we mean by “success.” And, when you get right down to it, opinions vary of what “best” means. I do want Obama to be successful on what would be best for this country, absolutely. Unfortunately, there is little that he campaigned on that would be good for this country.

    (Source: Red State article by Warner Todd Huston)

    Interesting indeed, Icarus.

  3. BTW:

    For those that don’t want to read the article from my last, the author goes on to note:

    So, the game-saying of wanting Obama to “succeed” is a meaningless exercise. On one hand every American wants the new president to succeed. But at what? That is the key question. We, each of us, want Obama to succeed at what we think is good for the country. So, right off the top the question itself is trope or even tripe.

    Further:

    The upshot is, we as conservatives and Republicans should want Barack Obama to fail if he is to strive for the wrong things. It’s not unAmerican, or even relatively impolite to say so, either.

    This is all not to say that Republicans and conservatives should treat Barack Obama in like manner as the ignorati of the lunatic left have treated George W. Bush. We should give Obama a fair hearing, agree when it’s appropriate, disagree when it isn’t and fight tooth and nail when we know we are right. We should eschew the sort of DailyKos, Huffington Post or DemocraticUnderground style of hate so prevalent with the left. But we should not go wobbly. Principled and firm opposition is called for, as always, cooler heads should prevail.

    So, here’s hoping great failure for Obama on all the things he should fail on and success with those things that are right and good for the United States of America.

  4. Icarus says:

    “I don’t need 400 words. I need four: ‘I hope he fails’. ”

    What is Rush doing to help Obama be a Reagan, Washington, or Lincoln? Rush doesn’t just want Obama to fail, he needs Obama to fail.

  5. Game Fan says:

    Most people don’t mind the hope and positivity. And maybe my left wing friend is right about this. Maybe the positive vibe is good. Just looking at these folks was like watching somebody get out of jail or something. And Bush’s popularity is in the teens. But as far as the people who want him to succeed? Succeed with what, the hope or the left wing agenda? Or the continued erosion of our Liberties? How come snooping and spying are no longer an issue? or concentration of power, unitary executive theory, national security letters. Where does Posse Comitatus stand? Habeus corpus. Pork barrel spending? nepotism revolving doors, globalism. Socialism.

  6. shep1975 says:

    No Debbie. There is a difference. We put our nation first. They put their party first. Him being another Kennedy does hurt our party, but will help our nation. If he’s another Carter, we all suffer the consequences. Democrats and Republicans reaped the economic prosperity of Ronald Reagan, and they hated him for it.

    If you think the party is more important, then wish him failure. As for me, “American” comes far ahead of “Republican” in how I define myself.

  7. Icarus says:

    O.K, Batman, I read the article that you posted. Nice article. Good points made there. Similar in theme to what I posted above, which is that if those who were in a postion to influence the public debate about why conservatism is better, and to articulate a coherent “go-forward” plan for the messes we’re currently in, and to help rally support for said plans, then Obama can succeed and we as a country can succeed. Only problem is, that article isn’t by Rush, or even about Rush.

    Rush was pretty clear. He needs 4 words. And “somebody’s got to say it” (which I think may be trademark infringement) doesn’t seemed to make me think I’m taking him out of context.

  8. LoyaltyIsMyHonor says:

    People still listen to Rush Limbaugh?
    That’s not a rhetorical question. Why do people feel the need to be told how to act and think? It’s sad actually.

    I can almost always pick out the person who listens to too much talk radio or reads too many blogs: They’re the one’s who sound like they’re speaking from talking points…and always throw around the terms “liberal” or “conservative.” For anything they like or dislike.

  9. Game Fan says:

    Are the people who supported Patrick Fitzgerald in the past still behind him, now that he’s looking into Tony Rezko and other aspects of the Chicago political machine?

  10. IndyInjun says:

    GF – Are the Republicans who trashed Fitzgerald willing to call him unbiased now that this attack dog is biting “the enemy.?”

    We need a GOP “Truth Commission” where the role of the GOP leadership in the massive fraud that has destroyed America economically and financially can be exposed in all of its revolting detail.

    The “truth” shall set the party free and so will recalling the perpetrators or hounding them relentlessly from office.

  11. I want Obama to succeed in some things but not in others. I don’t want things like government controlled health care, card check, the fairness doctrine, more government control over industry, massive increases in government spending etc… In as much as those are central to Obama’s plans I hope he falls flat on his face.

    I want Obama to succeed in reducing the divisive rancor in our political process , keeping our nation safe by defeating the Jihadists and other enemies, and turning our economy around. I’ll gladly support him as much as I can on those issues.

    Rush is talking about his desire to see liberalism fail. I share that desire. Perhaps Rush could have phrased it better but he’s an entertainer and not the spokesman for the Republican Party. Saying he wants Obama to fail garners more headlines and frankly it causes these Republicans who are rushing (no pun intended) to say they’ll help Obama pass his agenda explain just what part of his agenda they want passed. Given the Republican big government lovefest we’ve seen over the past several years they owe it to us to explain that.

  12. Decaturguy says:

    I have to disagree with you Buzz. Rush Limbaugh said what he meant, that he hopes Obama fails and, therefore, hopes that America fails. Therefore, he, Hannity, Coulter, et al, are unpatriotic and anti-American.

    After 9/11 there was nothing more I wanted (and 90% of Americans according to polls at the time) than for President Bush to unite Americans around a common cause. He ultimately failed at that task, and the country is worse off for it, but I wanted him to succeed even if I disagreed with some of his views.

  13. Decaturguy says:

    For just one day, Limbaugh, Hannity, and the other radio thugs, could have taken a moment to celebrate the peaceful transfer of power in the United States, when most counties transfer power through violent revolution.

    I guess these thugs would have preferred their side to hold onto power through violent means, whatever the cost might be.

  14. If only the Congressional Democrats had your attitude DG. Instead they ran for the tall grass when things got tough and sought to undermine Bush at every turn.

    Look, I don’t want liberalism advanced, but I believe not everything Obama will put forward will advance liberalism. I’ll support him on those issues. I can’t support him when he seeks to advance liberalism.

  15. My kin folks call me Nick says:

    Batman:

    The article makes it very clear that there is an open invitation to those people who wish to make America better. It seems clear that the President wants to govern from the center. The challenge is to have someone articulate what exactly the center is. If someone can do this, then maybe the President may govern from the center right.

  16. griftdrift says:

    You mean like that time they did in 2002 when they damned near passed anything the man wanted? When Bush had a 90% approval rating? Yes, yes, the liburals never gave Bush a chance.

    History is definitely getting its turn on the rack at Peach Pundit lately.

  17. Jason Pye says:

    Limbaugh’s comments were stupid, no doubt about that. But let’s not start using words like “unpatriotic.” I had enough of Republicans doing that to Democrats for the last eight years.

  18. So when did Social Security reform pass grift? How about making the tax cuts permanent? Regulating Fanny and Freddie? Yes, the liberals gave Bush everything he wanted. Thanks for the history lesson.

  19. Decaturguy says:

    Grift is absolutely right, Buzz. I was there at the time. I know. The first two years of his Presidency, Bush got everything he wanted. Most Democrats were scared to oppose any of his policies. Ted Kennedy even worked with him to get his education bill done. It wasn’t until after the hardcore Rovian tactics of the 2002 Congressional elections and the disasterous turn of the war in Iraq that things began to deteriorate.

    Look, I don’t want liberalism advanced, but I believe not everything Obama will put forward will advance liberalism. I’ll support him on those issues. I can’t support him when he seeks to advance liberalism.

    I think you mean that Buzz, I really do. Limbaugh/Hannity/Malkin/Coulter, I don’t think that they do, or they would have said it. They want the Republic to fail.

  20. Decaturguy says:

    Buzz, with the majorities Republicans had in Congress after the 2002 and 2004 elections, they could have passed those things even without Democratic support, but they couldn’t because even Republicans didn’t want to go along.

  21. My kin folks call me Nick says:

    These appear to be very critical times for the Rep. party. Will it be a voice of reason crying out in the wilderness or the voice of an angry outcast shunned by the people because of the demons that posses its soul?

  22. debbie0040 says:

    I don’t wish him failure but I do think we should oppose him very strongly when he is wrong and support him when he is right. I don’t think he should be given a pass. The libs did not give Bush one.

    His recovery plan is something that should be opposed…

  23. odinseye2k says:

    “Look, I don’t want liberalism advanced, but I believe not everything Obama will put forward will advance liberalism. I’ll support him on those issues. I can’t support him when he seeks to advance liberalism.”

    I think there’s a valid point in there somewhere. It is not a utilitarian argument but it is one nonetheless. Just as some rather far-left liberals want a world where everyone, painters, industrial titans, single-parents are equal in their circumstances because of the equality of their humanity, you want to see people in the circumstances fit to their usefulness to others and proclaimed importance in the market. In other words, the sloths get what they deserve as do the daring and the competitive.

    Both are kind of extremes, but speak to a certain morality of income.

    The problem you see is if universal health care becomes successful, it will be at least as popular as Social Security (probably more so, since you don’t have to wait until 65 to see it) and impossible to rip that bit of communal spirit from people. You see it in Europe – people sharpen the pitchforks when spending cuts are announced.

    Speaking as one liberal, I despise Reagan because of this “prosperity” that was claimed. However, prosperity has multiple readings. Yes, GDP grew, but you can see that the gains went only to some segments of society and led us to one that was more equal. However, I am glad that he managed to get inflation crushed out of the system and got some other things running.

    My opinion of Bush started as somewhat unimpressed but willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. I figured that he wouldn’t be a great president, but he probably wouldn’t do too much damage, either. What he actually did was what caused me to despise the man.

  24. odinseye2k says:

    “Yes, GDP grew, but you can see that the gains went only to some segments of society and led us to one that was more equal.”

    Damn those negations … I mean of course LESS equal.

  25. odin:

    Once again I feel the need to point out that POTUS – whoever that may be at any given point- doesn’t have NAEAR the power – Constitutionally, at least, that most of the Left (now, Right) thinks he does.

  26. Bill Simon says:

    We need a GOP “Truth Commission” where the role of the GOP leadership in the massive fraud that has destroyed America economically and financially can be exposed in all of its revolting detail.

    Riiight, Indy. Thank you for swallowing the Left’s blame-the-housing-market-financial-crisis-at-FannieMae, etc.-on-the-GOP-until-it-sticks-like-glue.

    Ignore Barney Frank’s role in in and some of the other Leftie-Dems.

  27. I oppose government run health care because I don’t think it works. I don’t care if it’s popular or not. We don’t need every hospital in American run like a VA hospital. Brittney Spears is popular but her music still sucks.

  28. Sorry, was trying to type and eat at same time on that last.

    NAEAR == NEAR…

    regarding odin’s 12:14:

    Could it be that said gains went to the segments that had actually earned them???

  29. Icarus says:

    “Limbaugh’s comments were stupid, no doubt about that. But let’s not start using words like “unpatriotic.” I had enough of Republicans doing that to Democrats for the last eight years.”

    I chose that word specifically for that reason.

  30. boyreporter says:

    Rugby’s right…again…about national health care. It works far more than it doesn’t. Nothing’s perfect, but national health care does work and work well. I’ve used it in Britain, and I know others who have intimate knowledge of it elsewhere.

    Here’s all you need to know about Rush Limbaugh: The day before the inauguration, as people were flooding into Washington to celebrate, listen to music and watch performers herald the new era…a new administration…he called it “The largest outdoor toilet event” in history, and said participants were there, not to wish Obama well, but to revel in their own self-congratulation. I don’t listen to him much, but I spin the dial that way occasionally, and I caught that gem. What a dark soul that “man” has.

  31. Icarus says:

    “I don’t wish him failure but I do think we should oppose him very strongly when he is wrong and support him when he is right.”

    There is a huge leap between opposing bad legislation and wishing failure upon him and the country. In articulating superior positions and policies, we as conservatives can help him be a success. If we choose to remove ourselves from the process and root for failure, we deserve whatever we get.

  32. IndyInjun says:

    Bill:

    The GOP has to cleanse itself. Blaming the Dems, when ITS “Republicans” are no different than the Dems leaves the perps in place.

    GOPers can’t do one damned thing about Frank or the other lamentable Dems.

    The GOP whining about the CRA, Fannie, and Freddie was amusing, given that Bush went running around giving speeches about the “ownership society” and bragging about all of the lower income folks who could “afford” homes. This happened while nearly 10,000 real estate appraisers were petitioning the SEC, Treasury, and anyone else who would listen about the FRAUD and its consequences.

    Bush and company held the regulatory power for 8 years. Saxby and company blindly supported every corrupt act, every mad spending bill, and every social program that Bush set before them.

    As far as the Dems go, Geithner has been pulling the strings of Paulson and Bernanke for about a year and a half, directing all manner of bailout idiocy. Out with the old crooks and in with the new.

    It is up to the GOP to retire its crooks and to hope that the Blue Dog trend in the other party can get real legs.

  33. Bucky:

    Never listened to Limbaugh in particular, but went through a phase during the 9 months I was living in Albany and working in Macon that I listened to Hannity and Levine, does that count?

    (To those that would ask ‘why?’: Have YOU ever had a 100 mile one way drive to work every day along pretty much open, empty highway?)

  34. DaleC says:

    My memory of 2000 is different from a lot of people posting here today.

    I remember a bitterly divided country with Dems screaming about a “stolen” election, the President Select etc.

    On Sept 11th, that all changed.

    That was when the 90% approval ratings and Congressional rubber stamps began.

    It is a joke to say the Dems wanted a successfull Bush Presidency in 2000.

  35. Bill_k says:

    Why does anyone consider Rush a “leader”? He couldn’t lead a horse to water. The man is an entertainer and a gadfly, and that is all he has ever succeeded at. He carefully screens his callers to make him look good. Anyone who takes him seriously about anything needs to get a life.

    As far as “liberal” and “conservative” policies – I don’t care what they are called as long as they work. I will support whatever helps this country and its citizens. Bush had 8 years to try his policies and they failed spectacularly. Now Obama gets a chance.

    To take universal health care as an example, this country has never tried it. What we have currently is a mish-mash of private/public solutions that seems mainly designed to enrich insurance companies. So let’s see what Obama can do. It has worked in some countries (Sweden, France) and not so well in others (England, Canada). The socialized medicine I got while serving in the Army was mediocre at times, but it was really nice not having to worry about how to pay for it.

  36. John Konop says:

    Debbie comments like this only promote a dysfunctional behavior on all sides like the Middle East. We need pragmatic solutions not hate filled grand standing on both sides!

    Americans need to come together in tough times like this not splinter apart like the Middle East.

    Your comment

    “Conservatives should give Obama the same chance that the liberals gave Bush after 2000.”

  37. jsm says:

    How do we measure a president’s success? By so-called polls. Obama’s policies can drive this Nation in the toilet, and he will only go so far down in the polls. Why? Because people are emotional creatures, and they are easily led around by people with slick buzz words and catch phrases because these things make them feel better. A candidate can be destroying this Nation while telling the people the things that make them feel hopeful and they’ll follow along like stupid lemmings. The 2008 election proved this.

    Liberal policies fail. When they do so over the next 4 years, we’ll be covered up in the administration’s excuses and spin. We all know this.

    This whole debate is silly, and no one in the mainstream takes Rush literally anway. He is making money off all of you through shock value. Congratulations.

  38. Bill:

    Actually, the country already has it, via the Veteran’s Hospitals.

    And again, every single veteran I’ve talked to that had to use those hospitals HATED the experience, and often had to wait FAR longer for a procedure to be done than they would have had they gone to the local hospital.

  39. John Konop says:

    I would suggest you pull your head out the sand and look what Bush/Rush and company promoted! Do you think funding the policemen of the world foreign policy on debt is fiscally conservative? Do you think financing tax cuts is conservative? Do you think putting tax payers on the hook for trillions of dollars with no real regulations is conservative?

  40. Bucky Plyler says:

    Bill-k’s call to Rush got screened out: so that’s a no.

    JSM-no?

    DaleC , John, Icarus, Debbie, Rugby, IndyInjun, Boy Rep, Buz, Bill, Odi, Grift, Jason, e-tal?

  41. Icarus says:

    Do I listen to Rush? Not much these days.

    And frankly, he has a lot of the problems of Lincoln and Buick. He caters to an age demographic that is dying. He seems all too willing to hurry them along in their journey by seeing how high he can increase their blood pressure.

  42. jsm says:

    Konop, the ‘policemen of the world’ tripe you’re whining about costs us about half what entitlements do every year. Also, true tax cuts pay for themselves plus some by raising overall revenue. The only thing people argue about on that anymore is who should get the tax ‘cuts,’ businesses or lazy people. Finally, remember that the whole motivation for the ‘trillions of dollars with no real regulations’ was government-mandated stupidity in the mortgage industry. Thank your favorite democrats for that idea–strong on emotion, empty on principle (sort of a theme for them).

  43. odinseye2k says:

    Bucky,

    Do I listen to Rush?

    Um, why? I tend to listen to people that are more intelligent than I am. That pretty much leaves me with things like Ted talks, Google talks, and so on and so forth.

    I also tried listening to liberal talk radio and couldn’t handle it. I prefer analysis to rah-rahing. Olbermann got old for me pretty fast, too. Maddow’s a bit better … I actually find myself rooting for Buchanan from time to time given what passing for talking head show guests these days.

    “How do we measure a president’s success? By so-called polls. Obama’s policies can drive this Nation in the toilet, and he will only go so far down in the polls. Why? Because people are emotional creatures, and they are easily led around by people with slick buzz words and catch phrases because these things make them feel better.”

    Jeez, so glad to hear the vote of confidence in the intelligence of normal people from someone that can’t read more than a single book.

  44. Dash Riptide says:

    OK-Dash doesn’t.

    I will say this, though. I know Limbaugh’s shtick and it hasn’t changed. What he’s really saying is that if Obama succeeds it will be at the expense of lowered expectations. He’s just saying that he hopes for a different (and more positive) outcome in the most provocative way possible. People fall for the sensationalism, new listeners tune in for whatever reason, and Rush further enriches himself. It’s an old game worthy of an eye roll and nothing more. I wish people would stop falling for it so that Rush, like Buick, would be stuck only with his faithful as they slowly die off. But no, instead Rush wins. Again.

    Suckers.

  45. Icarus says:

    “Also, true tax cuts pay for themselves plus some by raising overall revenue.”

    Another fact that we all know to be true, except that it isn’t. As we briefly discussed yesterday on an open thread, even Arthur Laffer himself is pointing out that this isn’t true. But we as “conservatives” have accepted it as mantra, and don’t think about the underlying logic behind it anymore. I’ll save repeating myself again, except to say that if it were true, we should cut our taxes to zero, because then revenue would increase to infinity.

  46. John Konop says:

    JSM

    FYI

    New Study on the Cost of the Iraq War THREE TRILLION DOLLARS

    By

    BIO-Joseph Eugene “Joe” Stiglitz (born February 9, 1943) is an American economist and a member of the Columbia University faculty. He is a recipient of the John Bates Clark Medal (1979) and the The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel (2001). Former Senior Vice President and Chief Economist of the World Bank, he is known for his critical view of globalization, free-market economists (whom he calls “free market fundamentalists”) and some international institutions like the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. In 2000 Stiglitz founded the Initiative for Policy Dialogue (IPD), a think tank on international development based at Columbia University. Since 2001 he has been a member of the Columbia faculty, and has held the rank of University Professor since 2003. He also chairs the University of Manchester’s Brooks World Poverty Institute and is a member of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences. Stiglitz is among the ten most cited economists in the world, as of 2008.[1]

    WATCH

    http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/poll-iraq-war-affecting-economic-downturn-say-9-in-10

  47. Bucky Plyler says:

    Icarus-Not Much -(Buicks & Lincolns have high bp )

    Odi-No- has hard time finding intellctual stimulus with talking heads

  48. Bill Simon says:

    (To those that would ask ‘why?’: Have YOU ever had a 100 mile one way drive to work every day along pretty much open, empty highway?)

    Aww, DK…you mean you don’t like scanning the stations looking for a station that plays enough Hank Williams and Elvis right before you get out of broadcast range? 🙂

  49. Bill Simon says:

    Icarus,

    I’ll save repeating myself again, except to say that if it were true, we should cut our taxes to zero, because then revenue would increase to infinity.

    Thus the reason why it is called the Laffer Curve

  50. Vic says:

    Up the Stoner River with Rush:

    “Too many whites are getting away with drug use…Too many whites are getting away with drug sales…The answer is to go out and find the ones who are getting away with it, convict them, and send them up the river, too.” –Rush Limbaugh 1995

    “The only way to reduce the number of nuclear weapons is to use them.” – Rush Limbaugh

    “I am addicted to prescription pain medication.” –Rush Limbaugh in 2003

  51. Doug Deal says:

    Why not give the man a chance to actually do something before people start wishing for him to fail. It is not his fault that over the years politicans from both parties have increased the power of the Federal government in order to favor their pet projects. That the government has thus grown to the point that people have to fear how Congress and the President might affect their daily lives. This is not what the founders invisioned, and it is not good for the country as a whole.

    Perhaps “conservatives [sic]” can now see why looking to the Federal government as an answer to their problems is a bad idea.

  52. jsm says:

    “If you understood the issue via the lending crisis you would know that a bigger issue is when we changed the rules on Credit Default Swaps.”

    Bigger issue? Nope. The core problem was pushing banks to lend to low income people, which resulted in mortgages that couldn’t feasibly be paid. Everything after that is a response to the problem.

  53. JRM2016 says:

    “These appear to be very critical times for the Rep. party. Will it be a voice of reason crying out in the wilderness or the voice of an angry outcast shunned by the people because of the demons that posses its soul?”

    Really? Am I the only one that has taken a look at the final popular vote tally in this election? Didn’t about 47-48% of the country vote Republican? You would not know it from the media coverage yesterday.

    And let’s get real about Congressional Dems during Bush terms. They had to support him after 9/11 because it would have been political suicide to do otherwise. As soon as they had an opportunity to begin to undermine Bush’s policies, which they viruently disagreed with, that is exactly what they did.

    And that is what Limbaugh is saying. He wants Obama’s platform to fail. That would include a failure to nationalize health care, banks, increase taxes, increase spending in every federal department, a failure to hastily withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan, a failure to close Club Gitmo, as Rush calls it, a failure to rescind the Mexico City policy that has prevented the use of federal tax dollars to fund abortions, etc. I don’t want any of those policies instituted either.

  54. Doug Deal says:

    jsm,

    I think that is bunk. The problem was amoral horse’s ends who knew the debt was bad and figured out a way to sell them to another guy. The pyramid scheme allowed for higher and higher concentrations of bad loans as bad debt assets were pushed onto someone else a little bit bigger. Who cares if someone else gets screwed as long as they made their quick buck?

    Since the originator had to suffer none of the consequences of their bad practices, they continued to generated these bad loans with gusto. Further, it was not low income people who were buying homes for $400,000 that sold for $200,000 a few years earlier, thinking they were going to double their money in 5 years. It was people who took their investment advice from “Flip This House” on HGTV instead of Clark Howard.

  55. Icarus says:

    O.K., I’ll jump ahead of what ever point Bucky is trying to make because by the time he gets around to making it, both me and my Buick are probably going to be dead.

    I’ve listened to enough of Rush Limbaugh to know one of his key phrases/mantras: Words Matter. Words Mean Things.

    Four words here: “I hope HE fails”

    This is not optimism. This is not a better alternative. This is schaeunfreude.

  56. IndyInjun says:

    Bucky, I listened to Rush probably 3 times in the last 2 weeks. I used to listen all the time, but the Rovian Lap Doigsm got to me so much that I had to take 1 part NPR to negate the 1 part Rush. The last time I listened I agreed with his ‘take’ but could not listen for long.

    Were I a lib, I would post on Huffpo, not talk up PP as my favorite blog. (OK, I lied, I really like Calculated Risk and Globaleconomicanalysis, but the only way those are political is that 90% despise what Bush did to the USA.)

    @Rugby who wrote “Liberal policies fail.”…..As do conservative ones.

    Ah, CONSERVATISM did not fail, it was never tried.

    The Bush 43 administration was an exercise in GRAND THEFT. This will be born out with perfect accuity in the coming months, bringing over the last sycophants currently in “the Dems are bad, too” denial.

  57. “Liberal policies fail.”
    As do conservative ones.

    Libertarianism is the Answer!

    Until then here is my suggested them song for the movement:
    <a href=”Stealers Wheel – Stuck In The Middle With You

    Well I don’t know why I came here tonight,
    I got the feeling that something ain’t right,
    I’m so scared in case I fall off my chair,
    And I’m wondering how I’ll get down the stairs,
    Clowns to the left of me,
    Jokers to the right, here I am,
    Stuck in the middle with you.

    Yes I’m stuck in the middle with you,
    And I’m wondering what it is I should do,
    It’s so hard to keep this smile from my face,
    Losing control, yeah, I’m all over the place,
    Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right,
    Here I am, stuck in the middle with you.

    Well you started out with nothing,
    And you’re proud that you’re a self made man,
    And your friends, they all come crawlin,
    Slap you on the back and say,
    Please…. Please…..

    Trying to make some sense of it all,
    But I can see that it makes no sense at all,
    Is it cool to go to sleep on the floor,
    ‘Cause I don’t think that I can take anymore
    Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right,
    Here I am, stuck in the middle with you.

    Well you started out with nothing,
    And you’re proud that you’re a self made man,
    And your friends, they all come crawlin,
    Slap you on the back and say,
    Please…. Please…..

    Well I don’t know why I came here tonight,
    I got the feeling that something ain’t right,
    I’m so scared in case I fall off my chair,
    And I’m wondering how I’ll get down the stairs,
    Clowns to the left of me,
    Jokers to the right, here I am,
    Stuck in the middle with you,
    Yes I’m stuck in the middle with you,
    Stuck in the middle with you.

  58. John Konop says:

    jsm

    Do you think poor people were getting jumbo balloon payment loans interest only with reverse amortization ? Do you even understand the relationship between a CDS and the mortgage crisis?

    You are really demonstrated armature hour in understanding on what happen!

    Did you know that the above are the most toxic loans? Do you understand that is the Mc-mansion and vacation home market? If you turn off your dial from Rush and try reading it might help you!

    I will give you a place that you can get a free education so you can at least say something partially intelligent about the topic.

  59. Icarus says:

    And now that we’re 80 comments into this discussion, does anyone have any thoughts about the Andy Young template for an Obama administration, or would you rather continue talking in circles about Rush Limbaugh?

  60. odinseye2k says:

    “I think that is bunk. The problem was amoral horse’s ends who knew the debt was bad and figured out a way to sell them to another guy. The pyramid scheme allowed for higher and higher concentrations of bad loans as bad debt assets were pushed onto someone else a little bit bigger.”

    At some level, Doug. But I think it was a little more insidious than that. I think many of these guys honestly believed they were cutting risk to order just like a drug dealer cuts his coke to deliver just the right high for the right price. All of these tranches and CDS instruments and powerful mathematical models were a little overpowered to essentially repeat a Madoff scheme.

    There was an overconfidence in the ability to manage things from the top with all of the fancy instruments and pay-back schemes rather than at the fundamentally lower levels. I don’t know how many what-ifs were run on the economy contracting by x%, so many layoffs, how a certain reduction in wages bled into a number of defaults, and so on and on.

    And of course a pretty healthy mix of those that were powered by ambition more than anything else out to do everything to take the money now and cover their butts against future blowback

  61. Doug Deal says:

    Odin,

    Maybe there is a lesson in there about not being able to manage from the top as well as one thinks. I wonder if that is applicable to other *cough* government *cough* areas of existence.

  62. Well at least talk about the main point of the post.

    Sorry Icarus, I guess no one read past “His answer was not only disappointing; I view it as unpatriotic, unimaginative, and emblematic of the failure of our current “conservative” leaders.”

    Maybe you can cut everything below that sentence and past it in a new post… just trying to help?

  63. Dash Riptide says:

    I’ve listened to enough of Rush Limbaugh to know one of his key phrases/mantras: Words Matter. Words Mean Things.

    Right. And in Rush’s case, provocative words mean ratings. He’s a shameless self-promoter, but he doesn’t hold elected office and he isn’t speaking on behalf of someone holding elected office. While you’re trying to use his “words mean things” mantra to prove a literal interpretation of something he said, Rush is laughing all the way to the bank.

  64. Bucky Plyler says:

    OK. According to my poll, only two of us listen to Rush with much frequency – yet there’s been much discussion about what he said from folks that never listen to him.

    Regardless of your ideology, most of us could learn a thing or two by just listening -especially when your ideology is challenged.

    Most of you would find Rush entertaining at the least. The political songs played on his show are really funny-whether you like them or not.

    I have a hard time listening to liberal heads or NPR but I do occasionally force myself just to see what they are thinking. In fact, most of my time on PP is doing just that. I think some of you are crazy-but to each his own.

    Icarus, thanks for the post. Maybe you’ll actually start listening to Rush. I plan on being around the capitol tomorrow for the GRTL march. It would be great to meet you.

  65. drjay says:

    i’m late to the discussion but i’m for talking in circles still–and i don’t find what rush said to be crazily provacative–it seems like his pretty standard fair…

  66. odinseye2k says:

    “Maybe there is a lesson in there about not being able to manage from the top as well as one thinks. I wonder if that is applicable to other *cough* government *cough* areas of existence.”

    If we get a major re-run of the anti-trust game and some constructive rebuilding of the union system and collective bargaining, we can talk.

    Also, there are a lot of well-established, pretty boring things that can be centralized safely. For example, road building hasn’t exactly been rocket science since the Romans. There are also open questions as to when the central plan is applied to the scaffold and when it is applied to things growing on the scaffold. I tend to favor the former over the latter.

  67. I’m a talk radio junkie. Glenn Beck is on from 9 – Noon, then Rush till 3, then Dave Ramsey. I get a steady diet of hate-mongering propaganda the entire work day. Beck and Limbaugh are well known haters and Ramsey hates debt.

  68. Icarus says:

    Bucky,

    Now that we have the point that we knew was coming, a few counter points.

    Note that it isn’t that we haven’t started listening to Rush, it’s that we’ve stopped. And we’ve stopped for the very reason you suggest we listen to him. We weren’t actually learning anything. He’s become intellectually lazy and does little more than pander to the “base” these days.

    I agree about listening to people from all sides. But to expect to have to cheerlead for someone who puts an R next to one’s name, or hope someone fails because they have a D next to their name, seems to negate any benefit from listening, doesn’t it.

    As for the political songs, I guess we might as well have a few hundred comments about how well his parody of “Puff the Magic Dragon” helped us.

    Which leads me to address Dash’s points. Rush loves it when the evil Liberals attack him, and then expects lemming like conservatives to rally ’round and drive up those ratings. But too many on our side think it’s great and funny or even evidence of their ability to lead the RNC to include Rush’s greatest hits along with their resume.

    I understand that Rush is an entertainer, and not a party leader. Unfortunately, our party leaders do not. It’s time for a few conservatives to start thinking for themselves, and quit being used like the rubes he’s playing us for.

  69. Dash Riptide says:

    I understand that Rush is an entertainer, and not a party leader. Unfortunately, our party leaders do not. It’s time for a few conservatives to start thinking for themselves, and quit being used like the rubes he’s playing us for.

    Exactly.

  70. IndyInjun says:

    Well, Obama probably will fail, due to the total fraud and utter irresponsibility permeating the financial system. The folks who did this control both parties, as witness the clearing of Geithner as Treasury Secretary. (That tax fraud dumped Zoe Baird, Kimba Wood, and Bernie Kerik, but not Geithner speaks volumes.)

    I looked for two elements that would tell me that the failure was as catastrophic as I feared – 1. That the legal accounting requirements were ditched in the rush to loan-to-distribute and 2. That good loans were welded to bad ones in CDO’s, meaning that losses would greatly exceed those from default/foreclosure/LIP/resale. Both elements have been confirmed with many foreclosure efforts unenforceable because the “lenders” don’t have the actual mortgage to satisfy the judges and last week by Sen. Schumer saying to media that financial assets to be remediated were split as much as 40 ways.

    The reason why CDO’s and associated fraud instruments could only bring 10 cents on the dollar is because that is what they are worth. To unravel the ownership of what part of these securities belong to whom, then break them down to their component loans – good, bad, and otherwise – means the application of more accounting and legal services than exist in the country!

    Obama, nor any other human, can fix this.

    To wish him bad luck is just unconscionable.

    I would not pee on Limbaugh if he were ablaze. He is a miserable sack of excrement.

  71. Bucky Plyler says:

    Icarus,

    I see you have some steam about this issue. I think the problems we have in the Rep. Party are our own making-not Rush’s. We have left our “base”.

    I’ll be around GRTL’s legislative director tomorrow. If you are not scared to be around them-I’ll be the big guy, with some hair left . I would love to meet you.

    Otherwise , I’ll have a hard time looking you up!

  72. DaleC says:

    I almost never listen to Rush or anyone else for that matter. I am almost evenly split between sports talk and tak radio, but I rarely am away from work long enough to hear much of it anymore.

    It is obvious to me that Rush meant Obama’s policies, which means Obama by extension, but I can see where those who don’t know much about him wouldn’t get it.

    Funny how we are supposed to know the 30 to 40 year old backstory and forgive Lowery for his very clearly worded statements, but not so for Rush’s comments made in the last 30 to 40 weeks.

  73. Icarus says:

    Bucky,

    My agent doesn’t let me do personal appearances yet. But if you need to find me, I’m on facebook. Send me a message there. Icarus Pundit.

    And again, my problem isn’t with Rush. I know what his role is, and have no problem with that.

    I have a REAL problem with our leaders that would rather follow an entertainer’s sound bite than craft intellectually sound policies and victory strategies.

  74. IndyInjun says:

    Worse, Bucky, you left your principles and that is what we will keep pounding away on, until the party repudiates those principles and us officially so that all parties can go one their merry way.

    The party ‘leaders’ naturally gravitate and open themselves up to the fawning Limbaughs and Erick Ericksons of the world while shutting off all exposure to the Indies of the world. I say we give them massive shock therapy.

    My challenge here on PP has been direct and forthright. Either get back to principles and repudiate the impostors that are in office, or revise those principles to whatever y’all believe – whatever that is – so the rest of us can decide whether you are worth keeping or dumping.

    Right now the bias is on DUMP, because your actions dictate an agenda ruinous to the country.

  75. Who are these “Republican Leaders” who blindly follow Rush? Just today John McCain took to the floor of the Senate to say Clinton should be approved immediately in spite of the fact her husband will continue to receive large sums of money from foreign governments. Meanwhile Timothy Geithner’s nomination will breeze through despite his tax evading past. I don’t see many Congressional Republicans taking Rush’s advice.

  76. Bucky Plyler says:

    Indy,

    Did my comments about GRTL set you off ? If that’s so, you’ll have a hard time pounding anyone on principle.

  77. Bull Moose says:

    It is absolutely unpatriotic to wish failure upon our new President.

    I worked hard for John McCain to be our next President and we were not successful, however, as Americans, together, our collective future is in the hands of President Obama and we should all hope that he is successful both in terms of raising the national moral as well as succeeding in getting our economy moving again.

    Let’s have a vigorous debate where necessary – on particular issues, but blind opposition for the sake of politics is part of the problem with the both conservatism and the Republican Party of today.

    Republicans would be wise to begin anew with an agenda from positions which reflect our, almost forgotten, core values such as smaller smarter government, less spending, and more personal responsibility. It has been said many times before, and I’ll say it again, when we, the Republican Party, run as the party of reform, we succeed.

  78. rugby says:

    “To say ‘Libertarian and good policies are the Answer!’ would have been redundant.”

    Libertarian arrogance knows no bounds.

  79. Libertarian arrogance knows no bounds.

    I thought this was the “I Hate Limbaugh and Love Obama even though I support the GOP because what I really LOVE and would like to talk about but no one else does is for Big Business to get with newly elected officials and continue policies to grow Big Government and keep morale high as the Country goes down the Shi**er status-quo” thread .
    Why spew venom on me just because I disagree?

  80. John Konop says:

    Daniel N. Adams

    In all due respect do you want to part of the solution or caught up in an unrealistic ideology? One of me favorites songs is “You can’t always get what you want”

  81. Just saw this after crawling through several layers of links. The article it comes from was written for The Nation. Since I am fairly new to the pundit scene, what is the bent of this particular organization??

    Only by effectively marshaling the power of government can Mr. Obama improve the actual conditions of peoples’ lives

    And people say we are paranoid when we talk of Orwell and Big Brother? There are many on this very forum that could have wrtten the exact same statement above, and many have come close.

  82. Icarus says:

    As I’ve said before Batman,

    Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean everyone isn’t out to get you.

  83. LOL, I knew it, DKB! They really are out to get us… Icarus, you crack me up.

    JK
    I consider the policies that we’ve seen presented as “part of the solution” displays the “unrealistic ideology” and “arrogance” of those in power. Cong. Jeff Flake said it best (paraphrase) “Those that think they can weild the hand of the Free-Market are about to be slapped by it.”

  84. However, what I really think this thread is about (and since it has over a 120 comments, not many will see this) is that if the GOP supporters in Georgia don’t get behind Obama, due to the fact Georgia is considered a “red” state, Georgia won’t get it’s share of the coming Pork. Hmmm? Am I right?
    Rush has the luxery of being able to hate on Obama, but the politicians and pundits in GA don’t. Comes off as being a little hippocritical to me.

  85. Icarus says:

    “Hmmm? Am I right?”

    Not even close, but we normally don’t let that slow you down.

    Go back and re-read (or just read, if you blew by it the first time) the actual post.

    It’s about a man that was elected on a spread the wealth/screw the rich platform who ended up being a great mayor with the support of those who had opposed him, and those who he himself had loathed. This didn’t happen because they hoped he would fail, it was because they reached out to him, showed him a better way, and made sure he succeeded.

    No where in this post does it suggest support for Obama’s stimulus plan, card check, future judicial appointments, or any other specific policy.

    It is merely an expression that if we can define the Obama presidency as a “success” (which is an extremely subjective term, with each individual able to make their own interpretation), then the country will be better off. If we end up defining his Presidency as a failure, most likely, it will not be.

    Each of us can decide on our own in 4 or 8 years if the Obama administration was successful. But failure, however defined, can only leave us worse off.

  86. IndyInjun says:

    Bucky wrote – Did my comments about GRTL set you off ?

    Nothing set me off, when you wrote …We have left our “base”., I was responding on the basis of your use of “we” and that it was not the “base” you (in the broader sense of “we” used) left, but the expoused principles of the party.

    You donned the red cape and tights and jumped in the ring under the wrong colors.

    Sorry for the misunderstanding of “we” that did not include ‘you.’

    As for GRTL, I agree with the main objective, but not to the point of being a single issue voter.

  87. Icarus:

    But failure, however defined, can only leave us worse off.

    Actually, BHO’s failure to implement his more leftist ideas/ideals will leave our country at WORST no better than it is now, and would actually be FAR better than the alternative, because if he is successful we will actually be far WORSE off than we currently are.

    Of course, the same could be said years ago about Bush and his rightist ideas/ideals.

  88. Harry says:

    From the Daily Mail (UK):

    Obama’s Victory–A British view

    A victory for the hysterical Oprah Winfrey, the mad racist preacher Jeremiah Wright, the US mainstream media who abandoned any sense of objectivity long ago, Europeans who despise America largely because they depend on her, comics who claim to be dangerous and fearless but would not dare attack genuinely powerful special interest groups. A victory for Obama-worshippers everywhere. A victory for the cult of the cult. A man who has done little with his life but has written about his achievements as if he had found the cure for cancer in between winning a marathon and building a nuclear reactor with his teeth. Victory for style over substance, hyperbole over history, rabble-raising over reality.

    A victory for Hollywood , the most dysfunctional community in the world. Victory for Streisand, Spielberg, Soros, Moore, and Sarandon. Victory for those who prefer welfare to will and interference to independence. For those who settle for group think and herd mentality rather than those who fight for individual initiative and the right to be out of step with meager political fashion. Victory for a man who is no friend of freedom. He and his people have already stated that media has to be controlled so as to be balanced, without realizing the extraordinary irony within that statement. Like most liberal zealots, the Obama worshippers constantly speak of Fox and Limbaugh, when the vast bulk of television stations and newspapers are drastically liberal and anti-conservative. Senior Democrat Chuck Schumer said that just as pornography should be censored, so should talk radio. In other words, one of the few free and open means of popular expression may well be cornered and beaten by bullies who even in triumph cannot tolerate any criticism and opposition.

    A victory for those who believe the state is better qualified to raise children than the family, for those who prefer teachers’ unions to teaching and for those who are naively convinced that if the West is sufficiently weak towards its enemies, war and terror will dissolve as quickly as the tears on the face of a leftist celebrity. A victory for social democracy even after most of Europe has come to the painful conclusion that social democracy leads to mediocrity, failure, unemployment, inflation, higher taxes and economic stagnation.

    A victory for intrusive lawyers, banal sentimentalists, social extremists and urban snobs.

    Congratulations America !

  89. Icarus says:

    Batman,

    Please, just once, try reading for comprehension some time, instead of looking at other people’s words as just a moment for you to take a breath before you repeat the same point that does not speak to the issue at hand.

  90. Fair enough… we’ll see.

    “Hmmm? Am I right?” Does it count that I was smiling when I wrote this? Not a smirky, Dr.Evil grin, more of a “I bet I’ll get Icarus to correct me with a wag of the finger, but would stop mid sentence if he could see the smile, grin.” I owe you a drink for playing along.

  91. Icarus says:

    Gee batman, If only I had put something about defining success as my central point in the previous post you chose to ignore before continuting to debate yourself.

    As I’m sure you’ve also been told before, If you don’t stop that, you’ll go blind.

    Daniel,

    I wouldn’t want to disappoint.

  92. Game Fan says:

    I used to be an avid listener to Rush in the ’90s too, although he always pissed me off on certain issues. Don’t listen to any of them any more, except once in a while. It’s painful to hear. I would rather listen to Clark Howard. But a few weeks ago Ollie North was filling in for Sean and, since I hadn’t heard him in a while, sounded like he had voice lessons or something. Hardly recognized him. But right now I’m a little suspicious of this “conservative strategy” that could be called “criticize every black liberal possible except Obama”. And once again, I don’t see the advantage to criticizing or piling on with black mayors, or Sheriffs outside your county, or leaders especially, unless you’re getting a decent bang for your buck. I consider Obama fair game, since I’m a taxpayer after all and he’s the new prez. don’t like the “black vs. white” deal or the “Blue States vs. Red States” concept either.

  93. I really think he’s right on this. While I certainly hope he leads with the rhetoric he campaigned on, an undivided America, it doesn’t appear that way. His selection of Biden, Clinton, his chief of staff and a tax evader don’t emit a lot of confidence.

    His first day in office and what foreign leader does he call? A Palestinian….. Not a wise move.

  94. gatormathis says:

    “Smart-Ass White Boys”

    ……mmmmm…..where have I heard that phrase before……..

    …surely it will come to me soon….

  95. John Konop says:

    FYI

    Does anyone really think Rush is conservative ie financing tax cuts?

    Rush Limbaugh Attacks Obama-Friendly Republicans: “They’re Drinking The Kool-Aid”

    More from Rush “I hate America” Limbaugh!

    HP-Sean Hannity interviewed Rush Limbaugh on Wednesday night and the conservative king of talk radio had plenty to criticize about the excitement surrounding President Obama’s inauguration.

    Saying he was “suspicious” of Obama, Limbaugh said the facial expressions of Obama supporters were “frightening” and slammed Republicans who’ve expressed hope that Obama succeeds:

    “They’re drinking the Kool-Aid… they’re afraid of being called racists.”

    Limbaugh claims that Obama’s race doesn’t matter to him now that he’s president, oddly comparing Obama’s being black to being a Martian:

    “He’s not black. He’s not from Mars.”

    But Limbaugh goes on to say that if Obama behaves more like Reagan – extending the Bush-era tax cuts – than FDR, he will consider the new president “a success.”

    watch

    http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/rush-limbaugh-attacks-obama-friendly-republicans-theyre-drinking-the-kool-aid

  96. Decaturguy wrote:

    For just one day, Limbaugh, Hannity, and the other radio thugs, could have taken a moment to celebrate the peaceful transfer of power in the United States, when most counties transfer power through violent revolution.

    I guess these thugs would have preferred their side to hold onto power through violent means, whatever the cost might be.

    At Bush’s first inauguration, left-wing protesters pelted his vehicle with eggs along the entire route to the Capitol. (source: “Fahrenheit 9/11”, where the Michael Moore presents the footage as a great and proud thing)

    At this inauguration, a few talking-head entertainers have criticized some preacher for giving an arguably-inflammatory benediction… and said they hope any left-wing policies that are enacted won’t stand the test of time.

    “Thugs”. “Violence”. Seriously.

    I don’t insult people by name very often on this blog… but Decaturguy, on this particular occasion you are a complete idiot.

  97. jsm says:

    Doug said: “I think that is bunk. The problem was amoral horse’s ends who knew the debt was bad and figured out a way to sell them to another guy.”

    I don’t disagree, but I still believe the root of the problem was government mandates on mortgage lending. The guy passing the bad debt along was just trying to make a buck like everybody else and ignoring the fact that this was unscrupulous.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/09/AR2008060902626.html

    “Further, it was not low income people who were buying homes for $400,000 that sold for $200,000 a few years earlier, thinking they were going to double their money in 5 years.”

    No doubt, but are these the majority of the failed mortgages? I don’t know the exact numbers on this, but I’ve seen a lot of poor people get kicked out of the $120k homes they were led to believe they could pay for.

    Konop said: “Do you think poor people were getting jumbo balloon payment loans interest only with reverse amortization ? Do you even understand the relationship between a CDS and the mortgage crisis?”

    I know some lower income people who lost a lot through interest-only balloon payment mortgages that the bank knew better than to make. No ‘reverse amortization’ in their case, but they very easily got in way over their heads and were told they could afford something that they couldn’t. The bank didn’t care, because they turned around and sold the mortgages. They made their money and kept Big Daddy Fed off their backs–i.e. 2 birds with one stone. You can keep your head in the clouds with how well-versed you think you are in ‘shop talk,’ but I see what happened here on the ground. The ‘party of the people’ wanted to get more people into home ownership without a plan for how to do it in a workable way. So they ended up giving people ‘the dream’ just long enough for them to get foreclosed and kicked out of said house. Some plan. As I said before, the rest, including your beloved CDS, is a result of the root problem.

    “If you turn off your dial from Rush and try reading it might help you!”

    Don’t make stupid incorrect assumptions about me.

  98. John Konop says:

    Steve Perkins

    I tell my kids two wrongs do make a right. And this was a very historic time in our country. I disagree with Obama on issues but I am proud to live in a country that a man named Barack Hussein Obama could get elected. Do you want to live in the Middle East which is divided by race, religion tribe…..?

  99. John Konop says:

    jsm

    Once again you are really looking bad! Do you know what JUMBO means in the lending business? Ok I will help you with more free education. Click your heals three times and say I will stop listening to Rush and try reading and thinking on my own.

    Jumbo mortgage

    In the United States, a jumbo mortgage is a mortgage with a loan amount above the industry-standard definition of conventional conforming loan limits. This standard is set by the two largest secondary market lenders, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Loans above the conforming limits may be offered by seller servicers of these wholesale institutions, as well as Wall Street conduits who provide warehouse financing for mortgage lenders. The loan amounts reflect average loan sizes nationwide. Jumbo mortgages apply when agency (FNMA and FHLMC) limits don’t cover the full loan amount. Fannie Mae (FNMA) and Freddie Mac (FHLMC) are large agencies that purchase the bulk of residential mortgages in the U.S. They set a limit on the maximum dollar value of any mortgage they will purchase from an individual lender. As of 2006, the limit is $417,000, or $625,500 in Alaska, Hawaii, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Other large investors, such as insurance companies and banks, step in to fill the need, with maximum mortgage amounts going to the $1 million or $2 million range. A loan in excess of $650,000 is referred to as a super jumbo mortgage. The average interest rates on jumbo mortgages are typically greater than is normal for conforming mortgages, and vary depending on property types and mortgage amount.
    On February 13, 2008 President Bush signed an economic stimulus package that temporarily increases the conforming limit to $729,750 until December 31, 2008. The limit for any area would be the greater of (1) the 2008 conforming loan limit ($417,000); or (2) 125% of the area median house price, but no more than 175% of the 2008 conforming loan limit ($729,750, which is 175% of $417,000)
    The value of raising the limits to these levels is questionable. The secondary paper market (resellers/buyers) have not freely adopted these new limits, making them essentially “theoretical.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jumbo_mortgage

  100. John Konop says:

    JSM,

    Let me help you also with math so you might understand the issue.

    Do you understand the average jumbo loan is two to four times higher?

    Do you understand statistically we have fewer buyers that could afford the loans via conventional lending?

    Do you understand the rental market is limited via the price of the home?

    Do you understand the highest write down rate via percentage and absolute dollar would be in this bucket?

    You know around 2% of America makes over 250K a year?

    Did you know in Washington 20% of every loan was jumbo!

    Do you need any more hints why this is a big problem?

  101. John Konop says:

    jsm

    I will help you again with basic math!

    Jumbo loans start at 400k and go up.

    If the average jumbo loan which is probably low is 650K, you understand that a salary of approximately 250k would be needed to make the 28% of income to debt ratio.

    Now if 20% of the market got the loans one could assume only 2 % could afford them on average via a traditional 30 year conventional loan. That would mean 18% of the loans are at risk.

    Now from a real dollar stand point you would have to multiple the 18% times around 3 to understand the % of dollars at risk vs. traditional loans.

    And since the rental and re-sell market is limited (JUMBO LOANS)via the size of the loan vs. a limited market, higher interest rate, high rental payment, high % of down payment, which would result in severity of loss being much hire than loans 250k or less. BTW this is the largest factor in loss is your severity by dollar and % of loan!

    Common sense would tell you that the JUMBO LOANS are the major risk side of the equation. Once again do you think poor people were in the JUMBO LOAN market?

    Now for your class assignment let see if you can connect credit swaps into this mess?

    Class over!

  102. Doug Deal says:

    John,

    Your math is wrong. With a 4% teaser rate on a 1 year interest only ARM with no escrow account, the debt ratio on a $650K house is as low as 100K. In 1 year, that changes dramatically, though.

  103. Clone Of B. Plyler says:

    After much reflection on the words of Icarus & many of you fibe PP contributors- Her’s my thoughts on 4 words: “I hope he fails.”

    Some of the Obama Agenda:
    * Roll back all restrictions on abortion.
    * Socialize Health Care
    * Pass a ONE TRILLION DOLLAR stimulus package
    * Appoint judges who believe the constitution breathes & changes according to their decisions & foreign law
    (I could go on but it’s redundant.)

    HOPE HE FAILS ON ALL THE ABOVE.

    * Keeping our nation ‘s defense strong against terrorism.

    HOPE HE SUCCEEDS. Now, does that make me American or UnAmerican?

  104. John Konop says:

    Doug Deal

    You are correct and that is why the banks are scared and want massive tax payer bailout for reserves when the balloons come due. Also that is why the government pushed mergers to shore up balances sheets to cover ratios. And the majority of them hit the next three years.

    And that is what I warned about years ago that a loan should not based on a temporary payment unless you have massive coverage!

    You should help jsm study!

  105. Tea Party says:

    As stated previously on PP, I am pretty sure that Mr. Obama will be much more’ right’ than his base prefers for the first four years, so he has a shot at POTUS in the next four years. If he stays right of his base after year four, and is re-elected, he will be adhering to the Andrew Young-esque education by fiscally conservative voters and decision influencers.

    Really interesting tie-in, Icarus. The Andy/Maynard years in Atlanta was truly ‘our’ time. Again, the Phoenix shall rise, though!

    The re-post from the UK was pretty harsh, and I suppose could point to a ‘worst-case’ for the 44th. I don’t think that this Administration will turn out to be the panacea for liberals or the anethma of convervatives predicted. Rather, I hope to see a new course over some pretty poor fiscal/foreign policy and financial regulation decisions.

    Rush used a cheap theatric, nothing more, to keep his listeners tuned in. To me, he lost whatever credibility he may have had being a polemic hack and hypocrite. I feel sorry for him but he should follow the Macon credo and “Kiss his ……, Loser.”

    Time for another pill….

  106. Icarus says:

    Finally,

    After 2 days and 150 comments, someone finally got the point of the thread.

    …and he’s on drugs.

  107. Dash Riptide says:

    And what is with all the hate for Buicks????

    The fact is almost no one under 60 wants to be seen in one, and they still won’t when they are 60 . The average Buick dealer probably sells two Buicks a month. That’s just how it is.

  108. Dash Riptide says:

    The average Buick dealer probably sells two Buicks a month.

    Seven a month, actually. Still, not good.

  109. Clone Of B. Plyler says:

    I travel & have been assigned a Buick Riviera at work-so I’m stuck with it. I imagine it as a Batmobile.

  110. Romegaguy says:

    Gee Rush says something to drive people back to listening to his crappy show so that he can charge advertisers higher rates so that he can make more money. Oxy Contin is expensive you know

  111. Clone Of B. Plyler says:

    Say what you will -there are a whole lot more people listening to him than are listening to us.

  112. Icarus says:

    I’m looking for quality, CoBP, not quantity.

    Not saying I’ve found that either, but I’m still hopeful.

  113. c_murrayiii says:

    Rush, to be honest, has lost his mind. He has started drinking his own kool-aid and believing half the tripe he spills. The so-called conservative talksters no longer advance the actual philosophy and ideology of our party or Conservative thought. They have simply reduced themselves to liberal-bashing and just as most broadcast news outlets and liberal pundits suffered from “Bush Derangment Syndrome”, most conservative pundits suffer from a more generalized “Liberal Derangement Syndrome” We are looking at a future in our country without an honest, thoughtful debate about Policy, Philosophy, and ideas. It has come down to “your a socialist, no explanation needed” and “your a hatemongerer, no explanation needed”. If Obama plans to follow through with his campaign pledges, I hope he fails, because his policies are wrong, his ideas are wrong, and he will curtail individual freedom in both the economic and personal spheres in this country. However, I hope Obama succeeds by abandoning his campaign foolishness and rolling back the real cause of our economic troubles, National Government intervention in the market.

  114. Bucky Plyler says:

    c_murray,

    Can you give me examples in our nation’s history where you think there was honest debate? If so, didn’t it always have some name calling or labels? Currently, pistol duels are out lawed !

  115. c_murrayiii says:

    You make a good point Bucky, especially around the early years of our Republic name calling and empty political bashing was fierce (Jefferson and Adams’ cronies in the newspapers in those days were worse than anything we have currently). But I do think between Taft’s presidency and the start of Clinton’s presidency the tone of politics was more generally focused on the debate between the ideas and philosophies of big government liberalism versus small government conservatism. You still had name calling and mud slinging, but it wasn’t bandied about as rampantly and the debates still focused mostly on whether we wanted government to advance and promote progress or whether we thought it was best to leave it up to individuals and the market. I believe the last election where there was an honest debate about policy and ideas was in 1994, and the Republicans won because they had better ideas. Since then however, things have devolved rapidly.

  116. Bucky Plyler says:

    c_murrayiii,

    Add the 24 hour news & media cycle to the mix. (didn’t really have it until the 80’s) I like some of it, but it also has editors that air only what they want aired. That’s why I like alternatives to major media-like talk radio. I think it adds some balance to the mix.

    If our forefathers would have had 24 hr. news there probably would have been more duels.

Comments are closed.