Please read a little before you fly off the handle on Dennis and Fannie and Freddie

[AllentownJake]

Dennis is not working with Norquest or Hamsher to go after Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel. On Christmas Eve it was announced that Treasury is removing caps for Fannie and Freddie and they were going to pay the chief executives millions of dollars.

The nature of Dennis's inquiry is one of congressional oversight. It has nothing to do with Rahm's tenure at Fannie or Freddie nor the assertions made by Hamsher and Norquest in their allegations Rahm committed fraud there as and agent for the firm or as a congressman.

People get upset when people fly of the handle on the President. If you want to remain your credibility educate yourself before you go nutty on Dennis over this inquiry, which is part of his responsibilities as a congressman.

Thank you,

AllentownJake

[endless october]

1. Kucinich is on our side.

i trust him quite a bit.

[Echo In Light]

4. Absotively

:bounce:

[lsewpershad]

102. He certainly is

on OUR side where all the others should be

[SemiCharmedQuark]

2. FDL appears to be trying to use Kucinich's announcement to bolster their case

The comments on the post and the post it self make it sound like Kucinich is talking about the Rahm incident. But if you read Kucinich's actual statement, he clearly is not talking about that.

[blondeatlast]

8. Exactly. At this point, if "Rahm" or "Emanuel" is in the SL, I'm just going to ignore it.

I know pure emotion, regardless of the point on the poli spectrum, is following.

[AllentownJake]

22. Yes Hamsher is involved in misinformation on this

and she shouldn't be allowed on DU quite soon if she keeps up this bullshit.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

27. Just about everyone spins--this is why we always need to verify things from the source.

So it is partially Hamsher's responsibility, but also our own responsibility to go to the source.

[inna]

100. How is she involved in misinformation?

Can you prove your accusation by linking to her statements that are supposedly misleading?

I have absolutely ZERO evidence that Jane has ever been deliberately misleading, but I am always open to new information.

[ProSense]

3. Please read to understand how nutty it is to investigate the Treasury on this

And the administration very much wants to keep this kind of intervention going. You can argue that some other policy — inflation targeting by the Fed, expanded fiscal stimulus, whatever — would be better. But none of these things seem politically possible. Keeping Fannie and Freddie fully engaged in the mortgage-support business is one of the few tools available to prop up a still very weak economy. And so they’re doing it.

link

[AllentownJake]

5. It is a congressional hearing

If everything is above board, it will come out in the hearing. I thought the President liked the Constitution.

[ProSense]

14. Holding a Congressional hearing

simply as a means of grandstanding is bogus. There are many Democrats, including Barney Frank, who have no issue with this.

The fact is even the critics cited by Krugman, are simply suggesting that the administration do a better job communicating why this needs to be done.

Trying to focus the economic crisis on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac makes no damn sense.

[AllentownJake]

15. Well if we can hold them for the BCS

I think this little matter won't be a problem.

[ProSense]

36. No, what we have here

is a series of knee-jerk reactions to anything the administration does, and people trying to disguise it as accountability.

[pscot]

78. You seem to be expert at knee jerk reactions

Not that there's anything wrong with that.:P

[truedelphi]

104. Thanks for posting this and thank you

For your taking on this issue.

Like you say, there is the Constitution. And that document backs those who want some transparency in the processes, very expensive processes, that are supposedly putting this nation's economy back on track.

[Hippo_Tron]

112. Yes one in which mostly Republicans will be doing the questioning

So that they can talk about how Fannie and Freddie help irresponsible (read: black) people to get loans.

[MadHound]

6. Thanks for stating the obvious,

But I'm afraid that there are posters around here who are deliberately playing up the fact that this was put out on FDL to somehow discredit Kucinich. Intellectual dishonesty at its finest:puke:

[rudy23]

7. It's an attempt to smear by association, just like we've seen here for months.

We'll see it all day today, and until this investigation is killed.

Here are the buzzwords to look for:

Naderite, Hamsherite, Norquist, leftbagger, Nazi, grandstander, ponies, whiner, hater, angry elf, 3% nationally, piece of shit, little fuck, FUCK, etc.

[AllentownJake]

11. It's a congressional hearing/inquiry

When the administration doesn't get a Public Option, I'm reminded he isn't a dictator. This is proof that yes, he in fact is not a dictator.

[rudy23]

17. I mean it's an attempt on Rahm & co's part to smear Dennis. nt

[hughee99]

18. Thank you for your concern...

Don't forget "concern troll". :)

[fascisthunter]

106. you seem concerned

[Individualist]

35. ...and it's a transparent attempt that fails every time.

[freddie mertz]

91. You forgot "firebagger." I still like that one the best.

:rofl: :patriot: :spray: :sarcasm: :dilemma: :nuke: O8)

[NJmaverick]

9. True, this is just Kucinich 's usual political grandstanding

nothing of significance (as is almost always the case) will come from his words.

[AllentownJake]

Maybe, but dumping news on Christmas Eve

Doesn't bolster the administrations cred on this either.

[NJmaverick]

20. Sorry but a Christmas Eve news announcement does not

equate to something sinister. It will take more than that to sell your case.

[AllentownJake]

26. There will be a hearing

Governed by procedure of Congress. If it is grandstanding, it's grandstanding. Why are you upset with a congressional hearing where the President has plenty of allies.

[NJmaverick]

32. and after mr grandstand milks it for all the points he can

no wrong doing will be found and that part will never be mentioned.

[freddie mertz]

93. It looks sneaky though. If there is nothing slippery, then let's find out.

[rudy23]

13. Ha! I called "grandstanding" two minutes before you said it! Check the times!

I mean right down to the word.

[NJmaverick]

19. So you predicted that someone would notice that it was nothing more than grandstanding

good for you. Do you want a Scobby snack or something?

[rudy23]

28. No, I mean I predicted the exact word as if it was from a list.

I mean, "grandstanding" isn't the most obscure word in the world, but I could guarantee it would be applied to Dennis, b/c I've seen it employed on here since July. I was proven exactly right.

That was really the first time the Message Discipline team would but heads with Dennis's Progressive stance, that time on single payer. It was the same buzzwords, from the same list--all that's been tweaked is the addition of "Hamsherite" to the list. Watch and see if I'm not proven right again today.

[NJmaverick]

33. I predict a ball will be called round. So what do I win?

[G_j]

62. talking point memo.. nt

[rudy23]

66. See post #7. It's getting too easy to see it coming. nt

[NJmaverick]

69. instead of patting yourself on your back for predicting people would say water is wet

why not read what Krugman has to say about the Fannie and Freddie issue.

[rudy23]

71. I dunno, "grandstander, 3%, UFO, Hamsher/Norquist" is a little more specific than "water is wet"

How did I know all those SPECIFIC terms were coming down the pike on this thread?

[JTFrog]

116. The same way folks can predict cheerleader, apologist, worshiper, cult member,

water-carrier or any other number of lovely little tidbits used against folks who happen to agree with or support Obama on anything.

Genius. :eyes:

[G_j]

76. why not find some new catch words?

there is no denying their use here.

[TayTay]

10. Legitimate oversight is what was missing during the Bush years

The Republicans refused to hold hearings that held government agencies accountable for their behavior.

It is the Constitutional mandate of Congress to hold oversight hearings. Dennis Kucinich is doing his job as a US Congressman when he holds such hearings. We need more of these type of hearings in the Congress. It is what a fully functioning Congress should be doing to safe guard the taxpayers of this country.

[ProSense]

25. I completely agree with that.

The problem is that there are many facets of this economic crisis that require investigating. Focusing on something that isn't a problem isn't going to change the system. Who really suspects the administration is doing something wrong by raising the cap? If people were serious about this, they would be looking into the root cause of this crisis and sending some people to jail.

[laughingliberal]

53. Appearances are also important to maintain credibility

If there is no good reason not to raise the cap, why could it not have waited until after the 1st of the year when it would have required Congressional approval? I don't know if it was appropriate or not. I do know it looks bad. If there is nothing to hide there will be nothing to hide and the administration will be vindicated. Could work in their favor just as easily. And, yes, there should have been a lot more looking into the root causes of the crisis and there should be some people serving time. Won't happen but no foul in trying to catch what abuses we can when we can.

[ProSense]

75. That's the problem

trying to portray this action as a big surprise.

[laughingliberal]

77. I'm sure it was all planned but what in the hell is wrong with waiting 7 days?

Why avoid the need for Congressional approval if this was such a necessary step to take. In HCR they kept their hands off preferring to let Congress work and then they turn around a do something like this so Congress does not get their say in it. It looks bad. If it is not bad it will vindicate them. Or are we now to question nothing?

[ProSense]

86. Why do you think Congress wasn't aware?

The Senate voted Thursday to raise the ceiling on the government debt to $12.4 trillion, a massive increase over the current limit and a political problem that President Barack Obama has promised to address next year.

The Senate's rare Christmas Eve vote, 60-39, follows House passage last week and raises the debt ceiling by $290 billion. The vote split mainly down party lines, with Democrats voting to raise the limit and Republicans voting against doing so.

The bill permits the Treasury Department to issue enough bonds to fund the government's operations and programs until mid-February. The Senate will vote again on the issue Jan. 20.

Obama must sign the measure into law to prevent a market-rattling, first-ever default on U.S. obligations. The government piled up a record $1.4 trillion deficit in 2009 to counter a meltdown in financial markets and help bring the nation out of its worst recession in seven decades.

link

[laughingliberal]

88. Perhaps that could be one thing we could find out. Did they know and, if so, why did they not

question it before now? Investigations can work both ways, you know. I am sure if Congress was well aware this was the intention and raised no objections beforehand the administration has someone with the intelligence to work that into testimony. No?

[Thickasabrick]

94. Thank you +1

[bigtree]

12. folks here scream and holler for accountability

Rep. Kucinich repeatedly offers to pursue that accountability from his congressional office. He deserves our support.

[rudy23]

16. Here's where you can donate to Dennis through Act Blue

http://www.actblue.com/page/fanniefreddie

[hughee99]

31. All the reps love "accountability", it's "oversight" they have a problem with.

I applaud DK for looking into this. If there's a problem, lets get it out there now, if not, lets show that everything is on the up and up.

For too long "oversight" committees have spent their time ignoring issues and waiting for things to be so fucked up that everyone notices them, and then investigate to hold someone (someone ELSE) responsible. I have yet to hear anyone say, "If we're the oversight committee, where the fuck were we when this was going on?"

[laughingliberal]

70. Much truth in that, yes.

Anyone who sat silent while this disaster headed straight for the American people has some 'splainin to do.

[JoeyT]

111. Not really.

They scream and holler for accountability for Republicans.
If it's accountability or oversight for our side they just scream and holler.

[Hippo_Tron]

113. I'm all for accountability

But that doesn't mean I have to naively believe that members of congress always use their oversight authority to enhance accountability rather than for their own political gain.

[seeinfweggos]

21. primary the kook

[AllentownJake]

23. Been tried a few times

Hasn't worked yet.

[seeinfweggos]

24. closer every time

[AllentownJake]

29. Keep trying

Maybe the President can make a swing in 2012 when he's campaigning for Joe.

[seeinfweggos]

37. hopefully ufo boy will be gone in '10

[Moochy]

40. DLC Smear Checklist: ufo's mentioned.. check. patronizing reference to his height ? 'boy' check.

Seeing Fuegos yet?

[seeinfweggos]

42. you forgot his child bride

[Moochy]

43. Mods, We Got a Live One

[seeinfweggos]

46. oh and "i believe life begins at conception" - denis kucinich

[Moochy]

48. call him a DemoRat, you know you can!

The True Villain of the Peice, Dennis Kucinich the evil flip flopper on abortion, and nefarious child-bride snatcher!

Your PFLAG icon is really the crucial part of your disguise.

[seeinfweggos]

52. anti-choice will do

[Moochy]

58. What other baseless Lies you got? Rated by NARAL 100%

# Journey in 2002 from pro-life to pro-choice. (Apr 2003)
# Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Jan 2007)
# Voted YES on allowing human embryonic stem cell research. (May 2005)
# Voted NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions. (Apr 2005)
# Voted NO on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother’s life. (Oct 2003)
# Voted YES on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research. (Feb 2003)
# Voted YES on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad. (May 2001)
# Voted YES on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes. (Apr 2001)
# Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortions. (Apr 2000)
# Voted YES on barring transporting minors to get an abortion. (Jun 1999)
# Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record. (Dec 2003)
# Emergency contraception for rape victims at all hospitals. (Sep 2006)
# Rated 0% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-choice stance. (Dec 2006)
# Ensure access to and funding for contraception. (Feb 2007)

http://www.ontheissues.org/Dennis_Kucinich.htm

[seeinfweggos]

96. 90 percent rating by the national right to life committee - 105th congress

[Moochy]

97. Yeah and what congress is this ?

Dishonest hacks make me angry.

[laughingliberal]

72. As I have said before

Kucinich very likely did change his stand on abortion to bring it more in line with the liberal wing of the party before he started a run for president. We could all wish a few more of our reps changed positions to be more in line with the left. Most position changes seem to be going the other direction these days.

[seeinfweggos]

80. president obama has ALWAYS supported the reproductive rights of women, unlike kucinich

[Moochy]

83. Ah you are back to admit you lied about his current position!

There is hope yet!

[AllentownJake]

41. I look forward to your endorsement of the primary process in 2012 nt.

[seeinfweggos]

45. threatening to primary president obama is about the least threatening thing ever

go for it. i hope dk runs against the president. he will only be humiliated.

[JVS]

49. Yeah, but threatening to look into Rahm's actions in the past is considered a prelude to toppling...

the Obama administration. This leaves me wondering: Who thinks Obama would allow himself to take a fall for Rahm? And who ever gave a shit about Rahm anyway?

[seeinfweggos]

56. who gives a shit about kucinich/norquist/hamster? - nobody

[Moochy]

59. Only the deceitful hacks like you who favor smears by association.

that's who, the ones who put them all on the same subject line, as if progressives are the president's opponents and not his base.

[seeinfweggos]

82. you mean the firedoglake - americansfortaxreform attacks on the president?

[Moochy]

84. Quick Look over Here! Keep Your Eye on the FDL Hamsher MacGuffin! Not the investigation

Thread Not Locked Yet... keep at it, I'm sure you can do it before the Night Shift takes over.

[rudy23]

63. Ha--I called this a long time ago, in post 7 of this thread. It's almost not even fun anymore.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7356586&mesg_id=7356635

[laughingliberal]

73. fish in a barrel, baby nt

[Moochy]

87. Agreed

:( the thrill is gone.

[AllentownJake]

51. Where did I say Obama

I could be talking about any number of democratic public officials in 2012
:rofl:

[seeinfweggos]

54. because i DARE kucinich to run against obama

that's what so many people here say they want. go for it!

[Moochy]

55. I think Kucinich will only respond to a DOUBLE BLUE DOG DARE

[seeinfweggos]

57. so we 97 percent of dems who voted against kucinich are all blue dogs?

[Moochy]

61. Straw Man Says Hi!

You are a clearly a Blue Dog Loyalty Flack, and have no interest except flaming this thread until it's locked with your baseless smears which when refuted will result in abandoned subthreads. Everyone knows your M.O. Message Disciplinarian.

[laughingliberal]

79. +1 nt

[rudy23]

65. The 3% reference--also on my list. Post 7 y'all.

It's amazing, the predictability.

[Moochy]

67. It's like they are all reading from the same Customer Service Script

The night shift is more creative than the day shift.

[rudy23]

68. Haha! That's exactly what it is. And I agree, they should use their big guns during the day.

That's when everyone's at the office, at their computers. No one ever accused Rahm of being the sharpest tack in the drawer.

[Moochy]

85. Are you Seein' Fuegos yet?

[laughingliberal]

74. ROFL!! nt

[rudy23]

60. I called "UFO" four minutes before you said it.

How is that even possible? Maybe it's the Discipline of your Message?

[JTFrog]

117. More of that genius showing through.

:eyes:

[rudy23]

I forgot "kook" and "UFO" smack

Otherwise, I'm pretty sure my list of smear words is pretty accurate.

[Moochy]

34. Love them Blue Dogs

Always so supportive and inclusive!!1111 :hug:

[Individualist]

38. Fail.

[seeinfweggos]

47. how clever

[clear eye]

107. What happened to the "observation & acceptance" you say in your profile

that you practice? You've been here all of a month and you're already telling us to dump a Democratic Congressman highly admired by the majority of DUers.

[StarfarerBill]

30. A breath of fresh air and common sense. Thank you, Jake.

[dave29]

39. He may not be doing these things (working with Norquist, etc)...

But, as I have said, these things have a way of taking on a life of their own. If Dennis winds up enabling a witch-hunt (not saying it would be intentional), I will not forgive him, period. Certainly he should be doing his job, but that should not be limited to investigating your own team just because it feels good to be the thorn every once and a while.

Lately Dennis has given me the impression he relishes this role more than seems justified. He may be on our team (depending on how you define our team, of course) but that doesn't mean he's always right, or above the politics of the moment.

[AllentownJake]

44. His statement is limited to actions of 2009 and Christmas eve nt.

[dave29]

50. "limited" to all of 2009, in other words

this is what I am talking about.

[berni_mccoy]

64. Right because reading is not required when we attack HCR or Obama around here.

[LWolf]

99. Apparently, reading is not required

when some dive in to attack perceived "enemies."

This thread isn't about HCR OR Obama.

[berni_mccoy]

101. No, this thread is about the Hamsher/Norquist Witch Hunt of Rahm Emanuel.

[LWolf]

108. It's certainly about Emmanuel.

Which is not what your response indicated.

I wouldn't call it a witch hunt. First, that's inaccurate. Second, it's an insult to witches.

[Starry Messenger]

81. Thank you.

Seeing that headline in here this morning using the Glenn Beck school of spurious logic was not a good start to the day.

[Thickasabrick]

89. Thanks for the unusual grasp of reality in these bizarre times. nt

[freddie mertz]

90. Thanks for cutting through the crap, Jake.

I found the bloody shirt waving in the "other" thread pretty off-putting.

[Vidar]

92. K&R.

[piratefish08]

95. Whatever the true story is, it needs to be told. I STILL want the transparency I was promised,

even when it is news I may not like.

When our government earns the trust of the public at large again, we can all stop living in fear on so many different fronts.............

[Bluenorthwest]

98. An honest post filled with actual truth

Thanks.

[mmonk]

103. Yes, this is about transparency and Congressional oversight.

Recommended for honesty.

[fascisthunter]

105. Let the coservative slime balls say what they want

they don't represent the views of the democratic party, they represent the corporate America. They have no leg to stand on...

[Nikki Stone1]

109. The voice of reason. :)

Thanks, buddy. :hi:

[AllentownJake]

110. You put the words Hamsher, Dennis K, and Fannie Mae in a paragraph

and some people will start having paranoid delusions.

[mmonk]

114. Emotions are running high. However, pusing for oversight is

Dennis Kucinich's MO and is unrelated to other events or actions.

[Forkboy]

115. It was just berni mccoy's weekly spasm.

You get used to them after awhile.

[Jamastiene]

118. K&R

People need to quit trying to smear Kucinich. It will only backfire. He's just doing his job.