The Continuing (Yet Incomplete) Education Of John Edwards (Ongoing...)

Was it only Wednesday we were mocking Edwards' claim that he joined a hedge fund in order to learn about financial markets and their connection to poverty?  The WaPo goes beyond mere mocking and points out (as I could have, darn it) that Fortress Investment Group is a player in sub-prime loans:

The hedge fund that employed John Edwards markedly expanded its subprime lending business while he worked there, becoming a major player in the high-risk mortgage sector Edwards has pilloried in his presidential campaign.

Edwards said yesterday that he was unaware of the push by the firm, Fortress Investment Group, into subprime lending and that he wishes he had asked more questions before taking the job. The former senator from North Carolina said he had asked Fortress officials whether it was involved in predatory lending practices before taking the job in 2005 and was assured it was not.

...

Edwards said yesterday that he recalls being told at the time of his hiring that some of Fortress's private equity holdings did lend to start-up businesses, which is why he asked about predatory lending practices. But he could not recall whether the firm's partners told him it had a major stake in Green Tree.

"Those are the things I remember," he said. "They may have told me more." Had he learned that Fortress owned a loan servicer with a history of predatory lending practices, he said, "I would have asked some very specific questions about it."

Fortress's growing role in the subprime lending market provides a second contrast between the firm's business practices and the positions Edwards has taken as the presidential candidate who has made poverty a major campaign theme. The Washington Post reported last month that Fortress's partners and its foreign investors benefited from the kind of offshore tax breaks Edwards has criticized as a candidate.

So let's see - he wanted to learn about the link between financial markets and poverty, but forgot to ask the follow-up questions about his employer's involvement in sub-prime lending.  His curiosity failed him at a critical juncture, on might say,

Jiminy - Edwards voted for war in 2002 on the basis of faulty intelligence, took a job in 2005 on the basis of faulty intelligence - when does he start with the tough follow-up questioning?

Dan Riehl has more, as does streiff at RedState.

Comments

[Jeff Dobbs]

The WaPo goes beyond mere mocking and points out (as I could have, darn it)

I Blame Bush

[PatrickR]

Nice phrase that, 'predatory lending practices'. Is it anything like 'predatory pricing', where a business sells its products at below market rates?

[Other Tom]

As Barry Bonds said about Babe Ruth, "no need talk about him no more." Bonds, as everyone knows, was very comically in error, but I think his assessment is quite appropriate for the effeminate and hopelessly out-of-touch Mr. Edwards.

What will the fool do with his time after he is disgraced yet again by the electorate? Do we foresee charitable works? Perhaps an updated version of the dolt Carter's phony home-building program? In fact, I think the latter might work very nicely, with the added fillip that each home will be a minimun of 10,000 square feet.

[clarice]

Ask and ye shall receive, OT:
"Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards proposed an $8 billion college scholarship program Friday that would pay first-year bills for nearly every college student in the nation. Funneling money by eliminating bank subsidies and tapping windfall profit taxes, Edwards said high school students across the country could benefit from an idea he has been testing at a high school in this impoverished rural community since 2005. Edwards returned Friday to Greene Central High School to announce that 74 percent of its graduating seniors will attend college this fall using hundreds of thousands of dollars in scholarships"

[Jeff Dobbs]

Do we foresee charitable works?

Lawyer --> politician --> hedge fund manager --> ???

I don't know. His career path to date wouldn't point to a work in philanthropy.

Maybe something at the UN?

[windansea]

Obama talks of hybrids, but his ride has a Hemi

Sen. Barack Obama talks a good game. He also drives a good car, but the two are not entirely compatible.

The Democratic presidential contender was in Detroit on Monday, oozing charisma and environmental awareness as he chided local automakers for building too many big vehicles and not enough fuel-efficient hybrids.

So his choice to drive a V8 Hemi-powered Chrysler 300C emits a whiff of hypocrisy along with its exhaust fumes

I just bought one...great car, and it does have an economy mode where the engine drops down to 4 cylinders if you are just cruising, so I am feeling pretty green :)

[Maybeex]

"When I signed this treaty with Kim Jong Il, I did ask him if he was involved in making nuclear weapons. If I would have known he had a nuclear program, I would have asked even more specific questions"

"I don't recall if Assad told me he was involved with terrorism. I did ask him, and he may have told me more. Had I known he was involved with terrorism, I would have asked more specific questions"

[Forbes]

So Edwards had a no-show job at Fortress?

When you actually show up for work, you tend to learn about the activities of your employer that even the most scrupulous of questions during your employment interview failed to uncover.

Relying, as Edwards does, to answers provided at the time of his hiring indicates he learned nothing while on-the-job, and suggests he wasn't.

[Jeff Dobbs]

Well, I bet he showed up a couple of times.

Comes in all smiles, with his hand outstrectched.

Someone comes up and offers their hand in return....and starts

--"Mr. Edwards, it's a pleasure to......"

Turning his hand so that his palm is facing upward John interupts

--"I'll need your contribution check first, please."

[Lew Clark]

"When I joined that group of construction workers in Chicago, to learn more about the blue collar workers in the other America, I guess I should have asked more questions. I thought we were installing security devices in the Sears Tower. It wasn't until we blew it up that I realized we weren't really a construction company, but a terrorist cell."

[clarice]

Hoosier..put yourself in Bush's shoes on 9/12. It is far from clear that this was not a false flag operation even today. Then, it was even iffier..esp as it was followed w/in a week by the anthrax attacks. What he did have was the intel agencies' assessments that Saddam had a well-developed bi/chem warfare program and was seeking to get yellowcake for his nuke program; he was continuing to play games with UN inspectors, the UN Security Council had reduced the sanction programs(which were as we know very porous) to 6 month incements, and our intel reported that he had substantial contacts with terrorists of various stripes--including Abu Nidal, AQ, etc all of whom sought to attack us and our itnerests here and abroad. Oh, and by then we knew that the mastermind of the earlier WTC bombing had escaped the US under a fake Iraqi passport and was residing in Iraq under Saddam's protection.

I would have done precisely the same thing in his position.

[Other Tom]

We have all known for a long time that when nut-cutting time came around, Hillary's people were going to destroy Obama, Edwards and anyone else (and there is no one else) standing in her path. What we didn't know was that the hatchet job would become entirely unnecessary. In the past ten days both of those gents have done what scores of war-rooms and hundreds of millions of dollars would have struggled to accomplish: They have made themselves into the butt of contemptuous jokes, and have become figures of ridicule. Hillary would be well advised to put a hold on her spending for a while, and to just sit back and enjoy the show with the rest of us. It's amateur hour.

[clarice]

When the hedgehog story is more widely known Edwards IS toast. (I understand CNN carried not a word on this yet.)

Obama, howevr, is still operating under even deeper media cover, but your point is well taken--Still Hillary! will not bear up well under the spotlights either..just better than these two clowns have.

[Rocco]

With bonafides including predatory lending practices, I would think he's be qualified to fill Malloch Brown's shoes at the World Bank. I wonder if he has any experience shredding documents?

[clarice]

Heh, Rocco..not a bad suggestion..I've been reading all these leaks about what the Board will do to Paul, and it's been a while since I played poker, but personally, I'd see the Board and raise them.

If they had the opposition so well locked up, I doubt they'd be calling every reporter in their rolodexes to say it was a lock. Plus I know these guys, they. don't have. the. balls. to. do. this.

[topsecretk9]

Sorry, OT, but this is pretty funny - via powerline on the USAts

Gonzales was able to do this because the committee Republicans didn't pile on him. They deserve credit for this, and for ridiculing the efforts of Democrats to create a scandal here. I particular liked Rep. Dan Lungren's comment that "we're acting like U.S. attorneys are the product of the Immaculate Conception, and once they've been created that cannot be undone." I hope Arlen Specter and his southern alter-ego Lindsey Graham were watching.

[Rocco]

I posted that and fell asleep. Time for some Geritol!

Isn't it a shame that the men who were fleecing the Iraqi people out of food and medicine are now railroading a guy who was trying to elimate those corrupt practices.

Significantly, Kofi Annan announced the retirement of Mr. Riza on January 15, 2005, exactly the same day that Riza notified the Volcker Committee that he had destroyed the documents.[6] Riza was immediately replaced by UNDP chief Mark Malloch Brown.

Keep in mind that Kojo's Cotecna only did business with Nigeria and Ghana. Seems like all corrupt roads lead to Nigeria.

[Rocco]

I should clarify that last sentence.

Keep in mind that Kojo's Cotecna only did business with Nigeria and Ghana. Well...in Kofi's own words from Meet The Press

SEC'Y-GEN. ANNAN: Let me be very clear on this. There's nothing in this. My son, at the age of 22, in 1995, started working for the company as a trainee. And then he was assigned to West Africa where he was working in Nigeria and Ghana on their operations there. He resigned in '97 and was given consultants so that he could help them out when required in the region. And then he resigned that function in '98. He had nothing to do with the oil-for-food program.

[PeterUK.]

Clarice,
The assassination plot on the a former president isn't exactly small beer,though it has got glossed over by the MSM and the Loyal Opposition.
Here is Hillary at her most melifluous basically saying she was suckered over Iraq.

[PatHMV]

Predatory lending involves lending money to poor people who you know will probably not be able to repay it, while charging them very high interest and other charges for the privilege.

Of course, if banks don't lend to poor people with bad credit, they may get accused of red-lining.

At any rate, predatory lending, which really has no solid, precise meaning, is present only at the very intersection between the capital markets and the poor people. If John Edwards were telling the truth about why he went to work for this company, why in the world did he not learn more about their work at the precise juncture he claimed to be interested in, high finance and poor people?

[Jeff Dobbs]

Other Tom:
Do we foresee charitable works? Perhaps an updated version of the dolt Carter's phony home-building program?

Wait a second. That got me thinking.....

I'm considering buying Monty Johnson's property next to Edwards, since he's indicated he needs to sell because he can't afford the property taxes.

I haven't finalized the plans, but I envision some kind of development that would house the homeless.

Buy the property, bring a crew of homeless to live on site in trailers, as we work together to build the sprawling complex.

[boris]

Start the fund raising with an on site outdoor rock concert!

[clarice]

I heart H & R.
Kaus has picked up TM's bit on Osama's pastor. Normally, I'd say that is not fair game, but as Romney's religion is being made so much of, I think we should get H & R a film crew and....well, you know where I'm heading, don't you? Hallelujah!

[Jane]

Buy the property, bring a crew of homeless to live on site in trailers, as we work together to build the sprawling complex.

Need some investors? If so, I'm in.

[Jeff Dobbs]

Yes, we definitely want lots of rock concerts.

Yes, we definitely need lots of investors.

And lots of brown paper bags.

[Jeff Dobbs]

More from Obama's Detroit speech in the Chicago Tribune...

Obama this week flew to Detroit to deliver his message that the U.S. auto industry is the villain for "investing in bigger and faster cars while foreign competitors invested in more fuel-efficient technology."

The domestics certainly haven't flooded showrooms with gas/electric hybrids like the Japanese. But in fairness, the newest Japanese assembly plant in the U.S. produces 14-m.p.g. Toyota Tundra pickups, not Prius hybrids rated at 60 m.p.g.

"While our fuel standards haven't moved from 27.5 miles per gallon in two decades, both China and Japan have surpassed us, with Japanese cars now getting an average of 45 miles to the gallon," Obama said.

"I'm not sure where he got that figure," Toyota spokesman Mike Michels said. "No carmaker gets 45 m.p.g. Ours is closer to 30 m.p.g."

If elected president, perhaps Obama's first appointment should be a fact-checker.

But let’s not be too tough on Obama, who has made more than a few miscues in recent weeks. It’s not like he said Japanese cars were getting 10,000 miles per gallon.

[PatrickR]

'Predatory lending involves lending money to poor people who you know will probably not be able to repay it...'

Why would anyone do that?

[Other Tom]

They would do it so that they could allow the poor sucker to service the debt as long as possible, and then we he can't they foreclose on the property and put it up for sale. Mind you, I'm the most laissez-faire pro-entrpreneur fellow on this site, but the idea that suckers can be induced to take out bad loans is beyond dispute. There are a ton of HUD and other regulations about disclosures that are all designed to prevent this happening, but as my dad used to say "you can't legislate against boneheads."

[Rocco]

I just can't get enough of this.

[PatrickR]

'They would do it so that they could allow the poor sucker to service the debt as long as possible, and then we he can't they foreclose on the property and put it up for sale.'

Why wouldn't the poor suckers just sell it themselves?

[BarbaraS]

Why wouldn't the poor suckers just sell it themselves?

A lot of them try but it takes time. And by the time they decide that is their only option it is too late. And a lot of them have not kept up repairs so that is another obstacle.

I once saw an ad to reduce mortgage payments with lower interest rates and called them up. I was about to retire in a couple of years and still owed 9 years on my mortgage. They wouldn't tell me what rate they were offering but when I asked for a ball park figure of what the payments would be they turned out to be about the same as I was paying without taxes and insurance included but for 15 years instead of 9. And my interest rate at that time was 10%. Closing and refinancing costs must be extremely high. Needless to say I did no business with them. I figured it was a scam.

[Maybeex]

If John Edwards were telling the truth about why he went to work for this company, why in the world did he not learn more about their work at the precise juncture he claimed to be interested in, high finance and poor people?

Good point PatHMV. But are we imagining John Edwards actually you know, worked for this company? Are we picturing him going into the office and stuff?
I kinda pictured him going to events and meetings and glad-handing potential investors. Then taking a paycheck from a supporter that knew Edwards needed cash inflow between elections.

[PatrickR]

'A lot of them try but it takes time. And by the time they decide that is their only option it is too late. And a lot of them have not kept up repairs so that is another obstacle.'

Which makes it all the more unlikely that the lenders deliberately gave money to people they knew wouldn't repay them.

It would be a very odd business plan that sought to make money by this strategy.

[Other Tom]

"Why wouldn't the poor suckers just sell it themselves?"

If they had any equity in the property, they could do so, provided they could list the property, sign a contract and get to closing before being foreclosed upon. But if they had any equity, the problem wouldn't arise in the first place. What has been occurring in the past year or so is that the contractual monthly payments suddenly increase sharply, and the borrower is so highly leveraged by a low-down-payment (in some cases, zero down) loan that the equity has evaporated as the housing bubble, if not bursting, at least deflates a little. Suddenly it is worth less than the borrower owes.

California, and I understand a number of other states now, has an "anti-deficiency" statute, which provides that a real-property mortgage lender must look exclusively to the secured property to satisfy the debt, so that once foreclosure has occurred the lender can't come after the borrower's remaining assets. But the lender nevertheless ends up with title to the property.

[Other Tom]

"Which makes it all the more unlikely that the lenders deliberately gave money to people they knew wouldn't repay them."

They don't. They just shift as much of the risk as possible to the borrower, and the borrower is often ignorant of the degree of the risk, or believes the market will continue going up and so is willing to assume that risk. The lender necessarily assumes some risk also, but at the end of the day at least he has whatever interest the borrower has paid, and owns the property as well. In anti-deficiency states, the borrower's indebtedness stops there, but he will never get another loan except on extraordinarily onerous terms. The lender has not been hoping for a default, he has just been minimizing the risk to himself should one occur.

[clarice]

The WashPo indicates his work for the company was very sporadic and minimal. He will not release his income tax forms so we aren't likely to find out how much he was paid. Perhaps given all this and the bundling of contributions to him by the company some shrewdy will file a complaint with the FEC to the effect that this is a disguised campaign contribution.
Tom:?
Jane?

[Maybeex]

some shrewdy will file a complaint with the FEC to the effect that this is a disguised campaign contribution.

I hope so.
He has already gotten in trouble for campaign contributions, although that's gone pretty much under the radar.
In the last election, it was found that employees of a law firm that had almost unanimously contributed to Edwards were reimbursed by the law firm's partners.
The Fortress contributions sound remarkably like that- with legal secretaries donating $1000 +.

Hopefully, while someone is looking into whether Edwards is running the same play on the donations will think to ask if he ever really *consulted* to earn his consulting fees.

[SunnyDay]

Have you read the recent letter from Ilario Pantano at defendthedefenders.org?

They need money and publicity.

[Jane]

Do complaints to the FEC ever work? I'm happy to participate, but fear it will go the way of your letter to the bar Clarice.

[clarice]

MY letter was not to the bar, Jane, it was to the DoJ Office of Professional Responsibility and they say they've opened an inquiry into it. I expect if you complain to the FEC they will have to do an intake file and an investigation as the charge is not facially preposterous. It only takes a letter..

City the Wa Po articles, not (a) he has no experience in these matters,(b) he didn't do much for hte mone (c) there were bundled contributions from the same folks at the same time, and (d) he's done this before..I think that gets it past the crank letter stage.

Just got an email from Soylent who's still working his butt off. I sent him a big JOM kiss. He claims he's now a lean, mean endorphine machine.(12 more weeks of training and then he's relatively freer so ecpect sheikh yer booty or soylent return about that time .)

[Maybeex]

It would be great to read Soylent here again. I'm very happy for him getting accepted into OCS- what an accomplishment.

[clarice]

He's so smart I never thought he wouldn't make it. He'll admit though tht getting thru the physical stuff is a big accomplishment considering his age.

[clarice]

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/05/eight_insurgents_killed_in_had.html>Haditha blog

[PatrickR]

'The lender has not been hoping for a default, he has just been minimizing the risk to himself should one occur.'

That's how it looks to me. Which I wouldn't describe as predatory.

At any rate, it's very different from PatHMV's claim: 'Predatory lending involves lending money to poor people who you know will probably not be able to repay it...'

[clarice]

C'mon Patrick..It is predatory lending AND there is already a Dem push on to bail out the suckers..So, Edwards cleans up on the deal and then picks your pocket to get votes for bailing out the victims .

[Other Tom]

It is my understanding that last week Edwards said we would learn how much he was paid when he filed his disclosure statement, which is supposed to be done this week as I recall. Seemed odd at the time that he wouldn't come right out with it, but I suspect his people are feverishly trying to jigger the numbers so as to camouflage that particular bit of compenstion.

[maryrose]

Is it just me or does Edwards appear to be really stumbling around in his campaign these days?He definitely is not ready for prime time this time around as he goes from one gaffe to another. I no longer consider him a serious candidate. Richardson is the one most likely to steal his thunder in the coming months.

[Other Tom]

Edwards is finished. He just has loads of money and nothing to do, and he loves the attention as much as he loves his hair and the sound of his own voice. I have never seen a candidate with this little substance poll as well as he does, although it's already clear he can't possibly be the nominee. And if he thinks he'll be selected as a running mate again he is utterly delusional.

[SunnyDay]

re: predatory lending - this is part and parcel of the sort of issue we deal with on my board.

There are some horror stories of people being misled and tricked, but by and large, if people would educate themselves, or take sane advice from someone who is educated, these lenders would be out of business.

The lenders are predatory in that they take advantage of people's ignorance and laziness. Several of these companies went bankrupt and are being prosecuted for misleading their investors. Others are actually in the business of taking people's houses. It's what they do.

I believe the companies are predatory, but the consumers are complicit in their own demise. They don't learn, won't listen, hear what they want to hear, and disregard all warnings about the disaster that's likely to occur.

I have a message board full of them. Some are buying now, some are being foreclosed, some are approaching foreclosure. By and large, they made really really stupid decisions, because someone told them what they wanted to hear.

[PatrickR]

'The lenders are predatory in that they take advantage of people's ignorance and laziness. Several of these companies went bankrupt and are being prosecuted for misleading their investors. Others are actually in the business of taking people's houses. It's what they do.'

Wouldn't it be easier to buy the houses with the investors' money in the first place? Why the roundabout method of lending the investors' money out, wait until the borrowers can't repay and then foreclose?

[clarice]

You get the interest AND the house without risk to you (You go after them for the difference if the house fetches less than the indebtedness) and the cost of the foreclosure is certainly figured into the interest payments.

The other way around, you have to bear the risks AND pay your investors out of the profits.

[SunnyDay]

Yep, and there are big fees paid up front on these loans. Some of those companies will churn, too, if they have a customer who is making the payments.

I can't remember who it was, in GA - that was the first state to go after the companies that were refinancing big time a few years ago.

They would also get older, less ducated consumers, who had lots of equity built up in their homes - they would mislead them - some had reps that would switch out the paperwork, slide the disclosures by the "slower" consumers (not very literate).

Really sleazy practices, right on the edge of illegal. Then those poor people, usually hard working people in or approaching retirement, who had been careful all their lives, would discover the loan was not what they thought, Many of those people lost their homes.

Lots of older people are used to a different world, when financial institutions were not he ravenous wolves they are now.

And the deficiencies - do you know how profitable that stuff is? Those debts are sold and resold. Bad debt is extremely profitable. Really.

[PatrickR]

'Bad debt is extremely profitable. Really.'

Not to the people who made the original loan it isn't.

This whole 'predatory lending' thing appears to have been a creation of the Andrew Cuomo HUD back in the 90s. The sub-prime mortgage market looks suspiciously like a reaction to the so called red-lining hysteria where banks were accused of discriminating against black neighborhoods by not approving loans in the neighborhoods where they predominated.

Inevitably some bad apples found a way to exploit some people, but economic reality is that less credit worthy people are a greater risk to lend to, and that means the potential reward to the lender has to be higher to induce the loans.

A few anecdotes here and there about foolish or confused people being fleeced doesn't make the industry disreputable.

[clarice]

I fully agree that people with bad credit can and should be charged more, but this was acase of encouraging people to borrow more than they could reasonably be able to afford by misleading them about the likelihood of interest increases and lending money to people with no downpaymwnts. I consider that a different thing altogether.

PUK, Mullah Dadullah is dead. Surely there's a poem or song in that.

[Wacky Hermit]

Echoing what OtherTom said, if this is the same Green Tree that I had a loan with, they do financing for manufactured homes. That in itself is what many would consider a "predatory" lending practice. Manufactured homes that aren't on their own lots are basically cars with 30 year car loans. They are always worth less than what's owed on them, they can't be refinanced after they're 10 years old, and you don't pay them off unless you live in the home longer than the home is really livable. We were never told at any time during the process of getting the loan that unlike real estate which generally appreciates, our house would depreciate no matter what. We were fortunate-- our loan with Green Tree was paid off by the insurance company when our home was totaled by a flood. Our neighbors were not so lucky. For some of them, the only way out was default.

[Barry]

Wacky, did you not know the facts about manufactured homes when you purchased? There is plenty of problems with some of these lenders and their practices. The consumer should have some idea of what he is purchasing, the historical resale value, etc.

[SunnyDay]

Predatory lending is defined as intentionally placing consumers in loan products with significantly worse terms and/or higher costs than loans offered to similarly qualified consumers in the region for the primary purpose of enriching the originator and with little or no regard for the costs to the consumer.

Definition by the Mortgage Bankers Association.

http://www.mortgagebankers.org

[SunnyDay]

Well, Wacky, someone did right by you at least once - when they sold you flood insurance.

The average consumer gets no education in personal finance unless their parents teach them. It's not a required course in college, it isn't taught in public schools.

I sold insurance for 20+ years. People will sign anything if they like you.

[PeterUK.]

"Is it just me or does Edwards appear to be really stumbling around in his campaign these days?He definitely is not ready for prime time this time around as he goes from one gaffe to another."

Obviously spending too much time in makeup.

[PeterUK.]

The one legged Mullah Dadullah,
whose record of crime could not be fuller.
A cruel Taleban,he beheaded and ran,
but now he is dead life's much duller.

[Syl]

Hi Peeps!

I'm BACK!

::groan::

My trusty old Dell finally died. :( Wouldn't even load its Bios.

So got a cheapo Acer....and here I am again! Was going crazy.

::waving:: Love you all!

[SunnyDay]

Syl!! We missed you. :)

[Jeff Dobbs]

Syl:
My trusty old Dell finally died. :( Wouldn't even load its Bios

I Blame Bush.

"They told me that if George W. Bush were reelected, artists would have their computers crushed. I guess they were right!"

[clarice]

Good work,PUK.
Glad you're back, Syl.
Now if JMH and Bad would just sign in ..

[PatrickR]

'...intentionally placing consumers in loan products with significantly worse terms and/or higher costs than loans offered to similarly qualified consumers...'

Again, that is a lot different than: 'Predatory lending involves lending money to poor people who you know will probably not be able to repay it...'

[Jane]

Don't worry, Chuck Schumer is proposing legislation for us to pay off the loans of people who can't do it on their own.

[Jeff Dobbs]

Jane:
Don't worry, Chuck Schumer is proposing legislation for us to pay off the loans of people who can't do it on their own

Hmmmm, so if I bought that Monty Johnson property next to John Edwards using a subprime mortgage...I could then rely on the dems to bail me out claiming to be a victim of predatory lending?

This could make for a really good story. (I may go change my voter registration to Dem, and throw a few buck Edwards way just for effect):

Democratic activist, hit and run, trying to live out the vision that John Edwards has used to propel his presidential campaign has bought the property adjacent to the Edwards household and has started a homeless shelter. Recently, he has found himself in dire straights, the vicitim of a predatory lender and soon to face foreclosure, unable to meet the rising mortgage payments of his subprime loan. He has pleaded with Edwards for assistance but so far has been turned down. Now, however, he is resting his hopes that the Democrats will pass a bill that will relieve him of his debt and secure a future that promises thousands of homeless people right on the Edwards doorstep.

[Jane]

I could then rely on the dems to bail me out claiming to be a victim of predatory lending?

Yup - well the dems using our money of course.

[clarice]

Instapundit has a good bit on Bush's efforts to end subsidies to private jets which are far less environmentally sound than commercial jets which are penalized even though per passenger they contribute a great deal less to greenhouse warming.
[quote]
President George W. Bush is proposing to cut the amount passenger carriers such as American Airlines and Continental Airlines pay in federal taxes each year by $1.68 billion. Most of that obligation would be shifted to small-jet operators, including General Motors Corp., Exxon Mobil Corp. and NetJets Inc., the business-jet charter company owned by Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Inc. . . .

Should Bush's proposal become law, the impact on owners and operators of the small jets ``is going to be significant,'' says Ed Bolen, whose Washington-based National Business Aviation Association trade group represents more than 8,000 companies including NetJets, GM and Exxon Mobil.[/quote]

Let 'Em Fly Coach, I say.

[Sue]

Most of that obligation would be shifted to small-jet operators

Someone needs to read the bill. Small-jet operators will not be the only ones impacted. Aviation in the US will look like Europe if this bill goes through. American Airlines and Continental are lobbying hard for this, if that is any indication of just who this bill will help and who it will hurt.

General Motors, Wal-Mart, Exxon and Buffett will just pay the price. The company my husband flies for will sell the airplane and tell my husband adios. And general aviation will belong to the ultra-rich, just what they wanted to begin with.

[clarice]

Explain, please. Buffett is fighting hard against this. On the surface instapunit's take seems right..why penalize commercial carriers and subsidize private jets?

[Sue]

Read the bill. Ask anyone who once flew private airplanes in Europe how the cost all but shut down general aviation there. It is the large airlines who wanted this. It is Buffett and thousands and thousands of private pilots who have banded together to fight it. You punish Buffett, I assure you, he won't notice the cost. But in the process general aviation will be for an elite few. Including Buffett who will just absorb the cost and move on.

[Jeff Dobbs]

Fred

John Roberts, Scooter Libby, Sandy Berger make an appearance in the speech...

[Jeff Dobbs]

Hitch on Shaha Riza

He ends with:

I have been living in Washington for a quarter of a century and have said some mean things about people and had some mean things said about me. Fair enough. I sat and thought for quite a while today and decided that this is the nastiest and dirtiest and cheapest campaign of character assassination I have ever seen. Yet almost everyone in my so-called profession seems to regard it with a smirk or as a feather in the cap. Good grief. If it succeeds in ruining two careers and poisoning two lives, I do so much hope that it makes the perpetrators—bankers and reporters working as a team—deliriously happy.

[clarice]

He's right, of course and the AHG report to the Board is a tissue of lies and half-truths. I am awaiting permission to publish it.

When Hitch ir right, he' right and a far better person to have in your corner than the entire clean toga crowd.

[Jeff Dobbs]

Well, by golly, ask him how much a loaf of bread and gallon of milk costs....

Obama: Reluctant with Secret Service

Democrat Barack Obama said Sunday he was reluctant to ask for Secret Service protection this early in the 2008 presidential race.

"I'm not an entourage guy. You know, up until recently, I was still taking my wife Michelle's grocery list and going to the grocery store once in awhile," the Illinois senator said

...because one can only imagine the damage suffered by Tom's breakfast table when the press last asked a politician about basic staples...

[Jeff Dobbs]

Well. From that link to Tom's earlier post....the gotcha on Rudy about the price of bread and milk.....Tom's quote from the article ends with...

At least he [Giuliani] nailed pump prices. “Gas, I think, is $2.89.”

So would Obama nail the price of gas?

You know, given that he's been all about ending "the tyranny of oil"

[clarice]

OPR has responded to my complaint about Patrick Fitzgerald's conduct in the Libby case:
"Based on the results of our inquiry we concluded that there was insufficient evidence of professional misconduct to warrant further investigation. Accordingly, we consider this matter to be closed."

It is dated May 7.

[SunnyDay]

FNC said that McNulty was resigning, they would have more later.

[maryrose]

As far as McNulty goes-what goes around comes around. Next time he'll know better than to make a deal with the devil and snitch out his compadres.

[Maybeex]

clarice- well, you finally heard back from them. Aren't you dying to know what they actually did to conduct their inquiry?

[clarice]

Sure take them a long time, didn't it?

I'd like to see when they allowed a US Atty to get away with this stuff--starting with the presser.

[SunnyDay]

So who are they? Do we know?

[triticale]

Yes, we definitely want lots of rock concerts.

Yes, we definitely need lots of investors.

And lots of brown paper bags.

I don't know about that. The rock concertts I've been to, little plastic bags were much more common.

[Travel Guy]

As for the airline tax change, I don't think that's a good idea. I think smaller airlines need to be able to rise up to the point where they can compete. That will bring pressure of the larger American airlines.

[Travel Guy]

As for the airline tax change, I don't think that's a good idea. I think smaller airlines need to be able to rise up to the point where they can compete. That will bring pressure of the larger American airlines.