This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Guest Post: How Reporters Provide Cover For Darrell Issa's Lies On The Countrywide "Scandal"
Submitted by David Fiderer
How Reporters Provide Cover for Darrell Issa's Lies on the Countrywide "Scandal"
A year ago, Associated Press reporter Larry Margasak got caught
in a lie. He manufactured a false lede by concealing critical
information:
Despite their denials, influential Democratic Sens. Kent
Conrad and Chris Dodd were told from the start they were getting VIP
mortgage discounts from one of the nation's largest lenders, the
official who handled their loans has told Congress in secret testimony.
The witness also recanted his statement. When asked a second time
if he told Dodd that he was getting special treatment, he said, "I don't
remember... but, you know, it was conveyed in some way, shape or form."
No honest journalist would report that Dodd was "told from the start,"
about a mortgage discount.
In fact, the Senate Ethics Committee found that this witness had
no credibility. It wrote, "The Committee has found no evidence
that ...anyone communicated to you or your family that you were
receiving specific discounts or other special treatment not available to
other borrowers." It also wrote, "The loans you received appear to have
been available industry-wide to borrowers with comparable loan
profiles. There is no evidence that the interest rates for your
Countrywide mortgages were below prevailing interest rates." The
Committee concluded, after a year-long investigation into the matter,
that the 28,000 customers in Countrywide's VIP program offered terms
that, "were not the best deals available at Countrywide or in the
marketplace at large." Customers," were required to meet the same
underwriting standards," as everyone else. Overall, it appeared that
Countrywide's VIP customers were "often offered quicker, or more
efficient loan processing."
In other words, Countrywide's customers had no reason to believe that
its VIP program much different from the VIP customer programs at Verizon, Expedia, Acura
and Pizza Hut. The Senate Ethics Committee cleared both Dodd and Conrad of all ethics
charges, and anyone who reviewed the terms extended to Dodd could figure out right away
that no material "discount," was ever extended. Later, documentary
evidence would emerge to show that the Countrywide "whistleblower" had
been telling lies from the start.
Margasak pulled a similar
stunt yesterday, when he reported that Countrywide extended
"discounted mortgages" to employees government sponsored enterprises,
while failing to mention that the Senate Ethics Committee found no
evidence that the deals were better than those offered to anyone else.
He also put forth this whopper:
The documents reveal that when Countrywide was depending on
government-sponsored firms to finance billions of dollars worth of
subprime loans that touched off the housing meltdown, it was giving
employees at the largest of those companies -Fannie Mae-sweetheart deals
on their own home loans.
That claim is more than a little deceptive on a variety of levels.
The GSEs didn't buy or insure subprime mortgages. They only purchased
subprime mortgage securities sold by investment banks. (That was how the
GSEs did an end-run around their own underwriting standards.) There's
no evidence that Countrywide needed the GSEs to make its subprime bonds
marketable. Countrywide's primary connection with the GSEs, which long
predated its involvement in the subprime segment, was selling prime
mortgages. Countrywide was the biggest mortgage lender, period.
Margasak relies on a six-degrees-of-separation conflation, wherein some
Fannie Mae employee, who may or may not have had anything to do with
the firm's portfolio criteria, gets a loan from the nation's largest
mortgage lender at market rates, and suddenly there's a conspiracy
theory to explain the subprime meltdown.
Like other bogus right wing scandals--corruption
at ACORN, Climategate, Black Panther voter suppression--the media
narrative about the "sweetheart deals" given to Countrywide VIP
customers appears to be impervious to fact checking. The story keeps
emerging in new mutant forms, in precisely the same manner that new
"evidence" against global warming keeps emerging on Fox News, where
professional liars--Andrew Breitbart, James Inhofe, Karl Rove--are given an unfettered platform. Darrell Issa and his staffers pull the same kinds
of stunts that Breitbart does. He carefully selects his facts to
fabricate scandals out of thin air. Six weeks ago he was pumping, "The Sestak Affair - Obama's Watergate?" His new
Countrywide VIP "scandal" is equally spurious, as reported by Margazak:
"In 1999, Countrywide reached an exclusive agreement to sell
Fannie Mae billions of dollars in mortgages at a discounted rate," Issa
said in the letter.Records compiled by a trade publication, Inside Mortgage Finance,
show Fannie rapidly expanding its purchases of Countrywide mortgages and
a decline in sales of them to Freddie.In 1998, Countrywide sold $25.6 billion in loans to Fannie and $17.7
billion to Freddie. By 1999, the figures were $30.8 billion to $11.2
billion in Fannie's favor. By 2004, the spread was much wider: $67.7
billion in Countrywide mortgages sold to Fannie Mae compared with $2.9
billion in mortgages sold to Freddie Mac.
Mortgage lenders sell mortgages to the GSEs for the same reason that
Proctor & Gamble sells Tide to Walmart. That's their business model.
Every sale of of a pool of mortgages is "exclusive" because you can't
sell the same mortgage to two different people. And if, as Issa claims,
Countrywide sold mortgages to Fannie at a "discounted rate," then Fannie
got a windfall. Of course, Issa's amorphous reference to a "discounted
rate," in the context of nothing, is meaningless. By the way,
Countrywide was not a player in the subprime market in 1999.
»
- 8784 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
I'm shocked I tell you, shocked!
It's easy to find no evidence if you don't look for it.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297020490860457433676422776354...
Agreed. Can't find what you're not looking for.
"In other words, Countrywide's customers had no reason to believe that its VIP program much different from the VIP customer programs at Verizon, Expedia, Acura and Pizza Hut."
But they had to trouble spilling the secrets on Pizza Hut. And all along they were telling me I was so special I got home delivery.
Anonymous
Unlike the WSJ editorial board, I link and source all claims. The WSJ editorial page overlooks the following: 1. Dodd made full disclosure on his mortgages. http://www.scribd.com/doc/11578841/Dodd-Final-Report 2. The equally divided committee--three Dems, three repubs-- stated tha they found "no evidence" of any terms that were better than market,http://dodd.senate.gov/multimedia/2009/080709_EthicsDecision.pdf the WSJ ed board's "substantial" insinuation comes from someone's imagination, not the written record . 3. Those of us who understand business and economics recognize that the numbers tell the story. Either the terms were better than market or they weren't. Look up all the links in the piece above and you'll see why the why the "whistleblower" never alleged that the terms were better than market.4. The WSJ editorial page makes a huge deal about $2700 in junk fees waived on $781,000 in mortgage debt. That's not a "sweetheart deal," that's a rounding error, and that's not evidence that the deal was better than tha available on the open market. 5. Which is why the WSJ needs to strain to parse words about "responses" and "explanations" rather than dealing with substance.
Give it up. We aren't buying your shit. Read the comments below and you'll see we've already voted on how worthless your article is. Someone toward the bottom judged it the worst posting ever on ZH. I concur.
Fiderer
There is no sense in defending your article. Despite claims to the contrary, this forum is overwhelmingly sympathetic to the right. If you provided proof that Einstein was a Democrat, the readers on this forum would begin chopping up his field equations as a hoax, and make claims that gravity was a suspicious fabrication of liberal media. If you're posting an article that originates from the left, you need to wear a bullet proof jacket around here.
And trust me, the responses you find are only a fraction of the right-side mentality around here. The truly hard-core conservatives who have been glued to Beck/Hannity for the past two hours while eating TV dinners in their lazy-boy recliners are far too dumb to muster a response or their objections. And object, they do!
Palin/Ms Stouffers 2012
Evidence to date (einstein) shows a consensus supporting the position that progressive micro management of society produces societal failure.
Very unlikely that Einstien would align with progressives,
Lab rats in charge of the lab is not likely to produce desirable /useful data.
Sympathetic to natural law VS. to perversion of natural law is not a demonstration of bias; It is a rejection of perversity.
Period.
What makes this thread somewhat inspiring is that even in this forum, the propaganda repeaters and shills must work to overcome market influence. With the cost of participation constrained to that of network, storage, and processing access, that work is orders of magnitude more difficult than in a purely broadcast medium.
David Fidere (I guess we're close enough now that we can leave letters out of each others names)
A few questions for clarification
1. The SCRIBD doc does not indicate on whose behalf CrossCheck (or Perkins Cole) were acting. Was it on behalf of Dodd or was it on behalf of the committee? That is, is this report the final analysis or is it akin to expert testimony?
Was this information provided by Dodd (full disclosure as you say) or was it obtained elsewhere?
If provided by Dodd, was the submission sworn testimony by Dodd, or is it like providing an audit, that is based on information provided?
2. You claim that Feinberg "recanted" his statement. But according to the Deseret News article in your link it says he first said it was verbal, then upon being asked a second time, said it may not have been verbal but was conveyed in some way (wink wink, nudge nudge, grin grin. Say no more. A wink's as good as a nod to a blind bat.). That sounds like clarifying, not recanting.
I just wanted to add my thanks for your noble quest.
I could never hope to understand business and economics as well as you. I'm not "a banker, a lawyer, and a journalist, a kind of Renaissance man" like you (http://www.opednews.com/articles/Examining-Political-Corrup-by-Joan-Brun...). But I can see that you are completely objective and have determined that Time (http://www.opednews.com/articles/1/Time-Rewrote-History-With-by-David-Fi...) downplayed Republican blame for the financial crisis and scapegoated Democrats like Clinton and Raines in putting them on the list. Hard hitting, pull no punches Renaissance man stuff. Well done.
I only have an MBA from a much higher ranked B-School than Stern (very close to the house those *&$_*^%# Republicans claim (and the Sun-Times but who's counting?) was purchased by Obama in a sweetheart deal involving Tony Rezko). But, not being a Renaissance man, I don't understand business and economics like you. But I did take statistics and have to admit (sheepishly) that I see an odd, inexplicable pattern in your stories. Democrats are always right and Republicans are always wrong. Weird. Like the strange coincidence in that your sources tend to be leftist rags like HP and American Prospect or far left shills like MediaMatters.
But that's the beauty of you hard-hitting bankers / lawyers / journalists. You go where the facts lead, with no worry over whose ox is gored, Democrat or Republican. You just want the truth. And that truth points to those bastards in the GOP (though I'm sure in the unlikely case a Democrat should ever do something wrong, you will be there raking the muck out in front of your fellow JournoLists
Well done sir. Keep speaking truth to power!
What an asinine post Keith, or is it Rachel? Anyhow, WSJ links and sorces like no other MSM. I get that WSJ insn't free of bias, but then again, neither are you.
I am entirely free of bias, and I proclaim the WSJ editorial pages to be the gold standard.
So there.
This article is the worse POS I've ever read on ZH.
ZH is always was a suspect in my mind. ZH behaves more and more as a provocateur apparently funded by either by Democratic party or CIA establishment.
Finally, about "respectable scientists". There is no such thing as "respectable scientists". The real science is founded on and derived from empirical facts rather than on a scientific reputation of science leaders. In science, major discoveries and breakthroughs brought down scientific views & theories supported by the most respected scientists of the "previous" generation.
Remember, for many centuries, the best scientific minds used bloodletting to treat all possible medical problems. Well, now we know it was not very smart.
+1000
Agreed. "Scientific concensus" is an oxymoron. Nearly every great discovery has been the result of a visionary giving "consensus" the middle finger, being dragged through the mud by the Luddites, and eventually being vindicated.
The global whining story reads like the Inquisition: grand High Priests guarding their data and interpreting it for you without ever showing you, any dissent declared heresy, the size of the mob being used as an argument for correctness rather than actual facts, its guardians demanding we all pay them a tribute on everything that moves, buy carbon indulgences, etc.
The ACORN thing is a joke as well. Who cares how many employees in how many cities are willing to help launder money from imported preteen prostitutes to help fund Senate campaigns for someone on their team? That's just one anecdote--their whole organization exists to grab as much slop from the trough as they can, and get as many people dependent on handouts as possible to get their poverty pimps reelected and dish out more welfare. They're parasites any way you look at them.
Typical partisan analysis. Defend the felon because he is your felon. Can't have a scandal with our felons. Then our guys would lose power and that would be worse than any felony. Because why? They wouldn't be able to totally federate the country anymore?
Get real. Dodd is as corrupt as they get in Washington. ACORN is as corrupt as they get anywhere. Manufactured scandals my a**.
What the hell those guys below (or above right now) discusing, global warming? Why not boobs of somebody, would have as much to do with the main post. The fucken trolls!
"Like other bogus right wing scandals--corruption at ACORN, Climategate, Black Panther voter suppression"
yeah all made up - acorn is clean, global warming is real, black panthers help old white ladies vote
some afternoon koolaid
hope and change
For a more effective rhetorical style, never use the phrase "you are xyz".
Ok, Cinncinatus. Thanks for the tip.
One thinks one is being a bit anal.
Your comment is so full of shit I don't even know where to start.
There's plenty of legitimate debate on this matter, and when it's all said and done, global warming will be proven to be the ridiculous bullshit that it is.
And I suppose the video of the BP's blocking voting booths was made up?? And no corruption in ACORN?? Are you Red Neck Republicant reborn??
Sheesh.
-
"global warming will be proven to be the ridiculous bullshit that it is."
Let me guess, Christian Fundamentalist?
I laughed at global warming long before anything like that came into my life.
Nice try at stereotyping though. Still love the boobs.
I don't agree with Muir either, but, I do agree his picture is mesmerizing.
More likely a member of the American Academy of Science.
Hey idiot -- yea you, Blano -- can you read? Did I not expressly state I am not addressing his points on the panthers and acorn? Do you really think I would not call you out on that?
And no, there is no legitimate debate. There are questions raised by Sen. Inhofe and his minions (you know, the same geniuses who believe that the world is 6000 years old and want to teach creationist mythology in HS science classes), but not by legitimate climatologists. In fact, I believe just this week ZH had a post which addressed, in part, this point:
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/6-must-read-essays-jeremy-grantham
I am sure you will find this link to be insufficient, but I do not have the time to go through a detailed response setting forth why you are objectively wrong and linking to numerous sites. From your tone, I know that my argument no matter how strong would be wasted on you.
Keep on living the dream (i.e., in complete and sweet ignorance).
Thanks for the laugh, dumbfuck.
hey resip
the poles were ice free for most of the time, the median temperature was 10 celsius degrees higher and co2 content of the athmosphere was at times double that high
these are facts that imhofer has nothing to do with
and for 10000 ago we had big ice capscovering europe
did the nenderthals change the climate so the huge icecaps melted
now who's igno-rant
Facts have no effect on the religious beliefs of people who cannot find their chakra.
Sorry, I only understand English. I am sure you made some interesting points but the hell if I can understand them.
"going through life willfully obtuse merely because it fits your political view is no way to go through life."
I agree. You should definitely stop that. Good for you though. Admitting your problem is the first step towards solving it.
OH, ZING!!!!
resip - global warming is not a matter of "gettin yourself educated." its a false religion and you appear to have a healthy amount of faith; either that or you own algore/GS carbon credits.
your condescension however almost convinced me - not
Don't you just love the golden nose mentality??
The ignorance here is overwhelming. Anyone who dismisses global warming is ignorant. Period. The only argument is to what degree. We KNOW increases in Co2 causes global warming. We KNOW we are introducing Co2 not previously circulating in the atmosphere thus increasing Co2 levels. It is NOT a binary yes/no argument. People should get educated before the make such serious claims.
YOUR ignorance is overwhelming.
The climate has been changing since Day 1. It'll keep changing one way or another long after we are all forgotten. There's nothing you can do about it. You overestimate man's significance in this matter.
YOU are the ignorant one.
-
I'm glad to ZH expanding.
Unfortunately, with such expansion comes the mediocrity.
Of which you have handsomely proven yourself, here as well as in other sites.
Such as?? Didn't know you cared enough to follow me around. I'm honored.
Are you the same user under a different username or just another hopeless victim of groupthink?
We do NOT know that c02 CAUSES global warming. That is a theory that has been put forward. It's a pretty stupid theory that collapses under the slightest bit of scrutiny, which is why you groupthinkers have taken to trying to indoctrinate children with your religion in science classes rather than having to explain it.
This isn't a Gawker blog, you know. Just because you are insistent and call anyone who disagrees 'uneducated', doesn't mean you're not going to get called on your BS claims.
Agreed... after all, if Glenn said it was so... it must be!
"We KNOW increases in Co2 causes global warming."
Really? Or does global warming cause increases in CO2? Or are both coincident with another factor?
"Anyone who dismisses global warming is ignorant."
Whether or not the earth is warming, or cooling, should be indisputable (though even that data was fudged). The cause of the warming, though, is very much unknown.
The Earth has had Ice Ages and warming periods before humans walked upright. How did those occur?
Earth warms from sun cycle. Oceans warm and release CO2. CO2 peaks about 1000 years following the temp peak.
Exactly, CO2 has been a lagging, not leading.
++++
One day I was on a flight and watched the Al Gore video and was sold on global warming... OK, I am a sucker. However, I grew up and here is why -
- last year I learned that for the previous 3 years the world had been "cooling", not warming
- I learned that the polar caps on Mars were melting and there was more oxygen in the upper atmosphere of Venus due to planetary "warming" ... can't see how our CO2 creation caused that.
- I learned that the data was fudged and that critical data was omitted
- I learned that Goldman Sachs would be a primary beneficiary of Cap and Trade and that the whole creation of the cap and trade was rumored to be a Bilderberg scam.
At the same time, I am 100% for eliminating the use of fossile fuels and coming up with permanent renewable energy systems. I like the long-term message, but the messengers are not credible.
more "evidence" of global warming
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/07/21/2959907.htm?section=justin
Appropo that someone who does not believe in global warming would advocate not getting oneself educated about the issue. Just fucking brilliant and spot on. Thank you.
Oh, I'm quite well informed about the bogus house of cards that is 'global warming'. Didn't you get the memo? A while back they changed the name from 'global warming' to 'climate change'. Something about the temperatures not going up for a while and a need to claim that every weather event that comes along is caused by anthropogenic global warming.
I'm all for someone educating themselves. In fact, you should try some actual education. That's far different from the groupthink indoctrination that you have obviously fallen prey to.
I was responding to NOTW777, who specifically stated it is not about getting educated. And yes, you are right that global warming does mean that in some geographic zones might go down due to climate change, but that overall and on a global scale temperatures will rise -- along with the sea level.
I am educated on the subject and I am not some Al Gore acolyte, although I do appreciate his massage antics. To describe my belief in the leading scientists of our time, rather than some crackpots with a political agenda cannot be accurate be described as "groupthink." Anyway, this debate is getting boring. You obviously cannot be convinced of my position and vice versa, no matter what the science overwhelmingly supports.
G'night.
The big gotcha is you switched from global warming to climate change... which is it or which is more convenient for the weather of the day?
The Earth warms and cools, period. CO2 is the cause? Doubtful, seriously, if it was plant life would be going bonkers, basic 2nd grade science supports that, it is not. The Conifer forest recycles the entire atmosphere every 24 hours alone, it ain't CO2 IF man is causing it, period. Could it be something else? Sure. CO2? No. Will those putting CO2 as the cause benefit by saying it is CO2? Hell yes, to the tune of $1T a year. Why would I believe anyone who would profit from the supposed cure of the cause? Only an idiot would believe the snake oil salesman who makes up the symptoms and miraculously has the cure in his suitcase, or massage table, whatever.
Ok. You win. Second grade science trumps the conclusions of the overwhelmingly majority of the best, most independent scientists in the world.
BTW, I did not switch anything. I do not care if you call it global warming, climate change or my fucking aunt cathy, the globe is getting hotter.
My mama taught me to always follow the money. If the scientists (and as one I'm using that one loosely) up and say the climate is changing but humans have nothing to do with it and can't change anything, where are they going to get their millions in grants to study it? They'll be suddenly redundant and tossed out on the streets and have to find real jobs.
I am educated on the subject and I am not some Al Gore acolyte, although I do appreciate his massage antics. To describe my belief in the leading scientists of our time, rather than some crackpots with a political agenda cannot be accurate be described as "groupthink." Anyway, this debate is getting boring. You obviously cannot be convinced of my position and vice versa, no matter what the science overwhelmingly supports.
G'night.
The moonbat is strong in this one . Having said that , I'm off to work on my second chakra .Let me guess, a creationist? No really, please answer.
Actually you are pathetic.
Who decides if a debate is legitimate? Suspending scientific method by declaring "it's settled" look like 100.0% election results in communist party conventions to me.
And talk about fitting to a political view and declaring Climategate a "bogus right wing scandal"...
Why so indignant? Please provide the sources of your absolutes...ones that are not bought and paid for? Impossible you say? Well there you have it.
I will give you that the climate is changing. I will give you that man impacts the environment. What is not certain is whether the sum of our activity is a direct and proximate cause, has meaningful impact on, climate changes we now see. It is also not know whether man can do anything to interrupt the cycle. CO2 levels may, or may not be within the range of historical norms. Temps however, are.
No matter what the truth is, the only certainties are; Climate changes. Always has, always will. Unproductive looters will seize every opportunity to prey upon the fearful, to produce in their stead. The planet will achieve balance, with or without the ability to support Human Doings. Lastly, When it comes to climate change, you are going to prefer warming over cooling, because food does not grow when all that white shit covers the ground...then again, we are due for a mass extinction.
Tons of legitimate debate by reputable scientists. Tons.
As told in this excellent book.
http://www.amazon.com/Deniers-Renowned-Scientists-Political-Persecution/dp/0980076315/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1279751108&sr=1-1
Resip, if you believe the totally discredited Global Warming meme is anything other than a Power Elite attempt to consolidate power and impose a worldwide carbon tax then your head must be inextricably lodged up Al 'Sex Poodle' Gore's butt.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAlMomLvu_4
http://www.thedailybell.com/738/Cost-of-Warming-Fraud-Comes-Clear.html
Please, do not cite a youtube video in an attempt to discredit what is considered hard science.
Who mentioned anything about the carbon tax? Not me. I do not doubt for a second that GS and the rest gerry rigged a way to make money out of the carbon tax legislation. I am not even arguing that the carbon tax is great law. But I do believe Govt has to be the lead in attacking the global warming problem, this will not be solved by the private market.
Richard Lindzen is a reputable scientist in the field and he doesn't agree with you.
I suggest that you open your mind a bit and consider evidence counter to your predispositions.
This:
http://www.amazon.com/Hockey-Stick-Illusion-Climategate-Independent/dp/1906768358/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1279757401&sr=8-1
is a wonderful book by a gentleman named Montford who recounts canadian mining engineer Stephen McIntyre's exhaustive debunking of the famous "hockey stick" graph and other work of its producer Michael Mann as well as similarly risible, in retrospect, work by Amman and Briffa.
The problems with your attempt to restrict debate to "experts in the field" are multifold. The first is that intelligent and diligent reviewers from other fields are often able to contribute to the debate. Michael Mann's hockey stick papers had been peer reviewed, but as Montford recounts, that review had been only cursory. No one had actually examined his data and tried to replicate his results. And McIntyre, originally a mining engineer, runs a web site called "Climate Audit" of which even a cursory perusal reveals a tremendously developed knowledge of the field.
Isn't information what counts? Isn't the truth what counts? McIntyre showed the falsity of what dozens of "experts in the field" had blandly accepted as true. Is that not to be acknowledged because he doesn't have the right sheepskin on the wall of his office?
A second problem with attempting to restrict debate only to "experts in the field" is that it's a comparatively small field. And as statistics professor Edward Wegman testified before congress (in the course of finding no value in Mann's hockey stick papers) the few scientists in the field constitute a self reinforcing social network. He expressed dismay that there was not more interaction with other disciplines as Mann's indefensible processing of data (to this day he has avoided releasing all his data and code!) would be caught right away.
With a relatively small number of scientists in the field you have a greater danger of what is sometimes termed "noble cause" corruption.
No one's discipline is impenetrable to all other scientists or even intelligent amateurs. The very attempt to limit debate rather than relying upon openness and transparency betrays a lack of confidence. But, worse, it's simply not consistent with the conduct of good science.
"There is no legitimate debate on this issue between intelligent people, not to mention reputable scientists who are experts in the field."
That's balderdash. I'm a scientist and make my money building computer models in earth sciences. Believe me, there's plenty of legitimate debate amongst us. IMHO, the methodology used in the AGW model validation has been slipshod beyond description. And, they make predictions with no confidence intervals after vast amounts of input data correction that they refused to disclose for many years. They don't even bother to attempt to account for data noise in . The IPCC does try to account for "modeling noise" but does so incorrectly. If you invested money in the market off their models, you would have lost a bunch of it over the last ten years. They are bad models that make bad predictions (if you don't believe that, google Trenbleth's emails from climate gate and look for the word "travesty". Then look at the subsequent emails he writes about the level of understanding amongst the climate experts about what is really going on. The AGW models suck and the folks who made them and publish their results know that. The rest of us are figuring it out. But other than that, there's no dispute.
Frankly, the attempt to declare the debate over is an attempt to not have their work reviewed by anyone other than the same 20-30 guys publishing the papers and taking in the grant money. They are not "all" of science.
The AGW guys may be right. But they haven't given a neutral observer any reason to believe their hypothesis.
In the 70s there was a global cooling scare blown up by the media and not really supported by scientists. The global warming is supported by scientific community. Whether you believe or not you have to agree that the polluting of the earths atmosphere is not a good thing, and to control the pollution is the responsible thing to do.
"Pollution"? I thought we were talking about carbon here.
Or is lumping carbon in with actual toxins kind of like lumping illegal aliens in with actual immigrants and just calling it all "immigration"?
Pollution is the introduction of contaminants into an environment that causes instability, disorder, harm or discomfort to the ecosystem i.e. physical systems or living organisms.[1] Pollution can take the form of chemical substances or energy, such as noise, heat, or light. Pollutants, the elements of pollution, can be foreign substances or energies, or naturally occurring; when naturally occurring, they are considered contaminants when they exceed natural levels.
Hope that clears things up.
Deal with reality much?
You got hate on!! Call the ACLU!
Can't call the 'tards out?
Watch your back buddy, lot's of the SEICU goofs are outa work (what a shock!) and willing to inject the koolaid in hopes of getting some more of the magic Keynesian dust.
Gun's and Religion buddy, load up.
Thanks for clarifying this one. Let me summarize: Democrats are good. They are unfair victims of those bad Republicans.
Since the Senate Ethics Committee cleared the Democrats, then nothing happened as they are the ultimate arbiters of morality and innocence.
"Friend of Angelo" was just a euphemism for treatment anyone off the street could get with their customer loyalty card.
What a load of Barbara Streisand. I thought ZH journalistic standards were higher than just reprinting Democrat talking points
Fidere is the writer. TD is the messenger, so hold your fire.
Besides, Tyler would never use the term " honest journalist " in the same sentence.
Granted. And he is a writer for the Huffington Post ('nuff said).
I wouldn't expect TD, as editor, to take HP commentary as gospel anymore than I would expect him to quote "Coast to Coast" as gospel.
Or for Muir to quote Gospel as gospel.
You are a very funny person. I get this image of Queen Nancy 'melting'
Watt's up with that?
Like other bogus right wing scandals--corruption at ACORN, Climategate, Black Panther voter suppression--
At least be informed enough to pick something with no merit.
This has got to be among the weakest pieces ever posted.
seems you don't know much about video editing, or missed the exposure of the "ACORN" takedown scam....
FoxTV counts on folks like you.
So help me out, which Fox program is the best example of agenda driven television?
Just turn it on -- any time.
I respectfully disagree, Rocky. While some of the commentators are over the top (Beck & Hannity) There are others who are pretty squared away (Bret Baire & Greta Van Susteren). I try and make a point of watching the different networks and think that often FOX is painted with too broad a brush. Much of it is center right, not fringe right.
I'll give ya that. Those buffoons who are on in the morning, however, make me want to regurgitate my cheerios.
Thanks Rocky, I never watch that bunch. Wow, a civil discourse on ZH? Others should take notice...
What the raccoon said.
Nice!
A magnificent example of the blind leading the blind.
Okay assclown.
The whole point was delivered perfectly.
Did you watch the video?
The naaLcp crowd went WILD when she made the 'out of context' remarks. The current regime went nuclear and had her fired. What this demonstrates is that this Regime is actively engaged in perpetuating a racial division that they were spooked into believing might backfire if it were to become to obvious., hence the 'firing'
Quit being a moron.
I don't know, but methinks TD just likes to rattle the cage and see how the zoo animals react. ZH is, compared to the moonbat or wingnut zoos, a much more exotic collection.
+++++
"By the way, Countrywide was not a player in the subprime market in 1999."
Is it April 1st, 2011? Did I sleep through the last half of 2010?
This post is so full of bias and b.s. it needs to be "flag as junk" ...
huffington post
a dog returns to its vomit
and a number of them eat their own pooh.
Please explain this one too (from the NY Post)
In 1994, Dodd purchased a one-third share of an Irish vacation home; the other two-thirds were bought by businessman William Kessinger, partner of one Edward Downe, who pleaded guilty to insider trading the same year.
In 2001, Dodd successfully lobbied the Clinton White House for a presidential pardon for Downe. A year later, Dodd took full ownership of the Irish property from Kessinger — at a mere fraction of its appraised value.
<sarcasm>
Easy. The NY Post works for Karl Rove and the vast right wing conspiracy ...
</sarcasm>
The aspiring "amateur hour" blogger that posted this should never be allowed to post on ZH again ...
I think this post was put up because TD was really hurt by Redneck Republifuck's comment claiming he was unobjective.
Good for you, Tyler! I knew deep down inside that you weren't a Republican schill!
I would junk OP simply because it's horseshit. It's the MSNBC/Maddow/Olbermann style that doesn't live up to ZH standards, as opposed to its stance.
more "bogus right wing scandals"
http://www.nationalenquirer.com/exclusive_al_gore_sex_scandal_two_new_female_accusers_assault/celebrity/69024
LOL "Take care of THIS"
Local Warming
It's heartwarming to finally see someone stand up for the courage and moral rectitude of our elected civil servants and for the exemplary way in which Fannie and Freddie conducted their business and never once cost the taxpayers a dime.
sarcasm<off>
acorn - just a bogus scandal dreamed by by evil republicans??????????
http://www.rottenacorn.com/activityMap.html
The article is useless as the writer clarifies that he always takes the same side regardless of the facts. Must feel good to know you're associated with a political party that never does wrong, never is corrupt, etc. Puh-lease.
+1
lovable black panthers givin some respect to bin laden
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h19ETFNCvD4
The story keeps emerging in new mutant forms, in precisely the same manner that new "evidence" against global warming keeps emerging on Fox News...
WTF?? Some libtard squid sucking scumbag wrote that.
Achoo!.. excuse me. I allergic to aluminum.
Too oblique for me....
you're going to be in for it when Gates' geo engineers go full out with the aluminum based chem trail spraying.
DOW chart update :
http://stockmarket618.wordpress.com
Even with a changed avatar your stuff is still junk.
This rehash of moronic Democrat talking points is beneath Zerohedge.
+10...
I might except Blago. That guy could tell us stories.
WOW Tyler you're really letting your left-wing defects show with posting this drivel. Pretty disgraceful and embarrassing to provide space to a 5th rate Obama sycophant and Dodd FNM / CFC corruption apologist. What kind of perks did they promise you?
possible that tyler is just:
1) testing a site detector (like a smoke alarm), or
2) discreetly polling to determine # of koolaid drinkers in the audience
(they did raise their hands)
Of all the articles I've seen posted on ZH, this is the most pathetic.
Maybe ZH should do a little fact checking before becoming a shill of the Democratic party.
As opposed to CNBC whose professional liars are Bernanke, Bwarny Fwank, Geitner, et al? Or MSNBC who counts on the deft two-tongued skills of Dodd, Pelosi, Reid, and BHO himself?
...weak
From mid 90's to this year I was in the mortgage business. To set the record straight I never originated an option ARM or a sub prime loan. I didn't have to. My clients were all prime borrowers. I was a top ten producer for a top 5 company consistently. I know the mortgage business.
OK - that's out the way. This is one of the most distorted pieces of nonsense I have seen in years. You either work for Barney Frank or Chris Dodd. They are both crooked, clueless and dangerous people who let Fannie and Freddie go bankrupt. I knew a lot folks in the business who saw the demise of these two GSE's and were incredulous about the above two clowns. Those two were the chief cheer leaders and cops on the beat. They should be in jail. So should orange faced Mozilo.
Have to agree, after all the Senate Ethics Committee are you kidding, this committee is not about ethics but rather about their self serving political needs at the time. Look at their history. Look who is on or has been on the committee.
From mid 90's to this year I was in the mortgage business. To set the record straight I never originated an option ARM or a sub prime loan. I didn't have to. My clients were all prime borrowers. I was a top ten producer for a top 5 company consistently. I know the mortgage business.
OK - that's out the way.
@alex44
Hey. Thanks for your autobiography.
I'm a skull base neurosurgeon and I can pull a pituitary tumor out of your nostrils. I did my endonasal transsphenoidal fellowship at Barrow. I know neurosurgery.
OK - with that out of the way. I can tell you....you have brain damage.
Sorry for the diagnosis.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fioC34LZeg&feature=related
I thought it was a fine article. Every point was accurate and lacked a biased view.
So, whassamatta with you others? Didn't fit your bias confirmation daily fix? Were some preconceived notions bent out of shape.
Sometimes you just have to be objective and let 'er fly.
You must have real blinders on there, Rocky. This is the most unobjective article posted on ZH yet.
I liked it, you didn't. Fair enough.
(Those are raccoon eyes, not blinders.)
All the comments on this article just goes to show how divided this country is. The media has done its job for the oligarchs who own them. Divide and conquer. It is as old as Caesar and it still works today. While everybody is at everybody's throats, the 1% ers just get richer sso the they can subvert the democratic process further with their money. Do you think Limpballs is really worth $400 mill? He is paid this to keep the country divided. Until we become united and demand money is removed from politics, the beat will go on. With new divisions created everyday. It is pitiful.
Tyler, why no "flag as junk" option on the guest post?
Because you vote on posts using the "stars" at the end of the post, not the "junk".
Thank you for reminding me. Is there such a thing as a negative star?
Wish it were so.
Also, Tyler or Marla, if you're listening, how about a "Right on, brother" to match the "Junk" vote on comments.
beat me to it...
Gentlemen (and Ladies),
Have we no gratitude for a man who has spent his whole life in selfless service of his country and impoverished himself in the process?
That cut rate mortgage should be thought of a gift from a grateful nation and an act of charity for a man who (after his much lamented retirement from that august body, the US Senate), will barely be able to feed his family. I am told he has be reduced to accepting a job at a glad-hander at a upscale restaurant for lobbyists on K St on top of his usual job as a greeter at WalMart.
Shame on us, gentlemen (and ladies), shame on us!
stupidity off...
On another topic, the premier physicist in the world, (at the time--approx. 1900) Lord Kelvin, advised ambitious young men seeking a career in science to avoid physics as "everything of importance was already known." Fortunately, a young physicist working in a Swiss patent office at the time did not get the memo (his name was A. Einstein).
Just an FYI, science is never, never, never settled. Climate science is roughly at the stage chemistry was at in the Middle Ages (it was called "alchemy" and was mainly occupied with converting lead to gold).
By the way, resip(whatever), I already have multiple degrees in hard science. Educate yourself before you talk down to me (or anyone else for that matter). My experience is that the most ignorant among us are the most certain.
Waiting for a ZH guest post on Darwinism vs Creationism. That one would be interesting. Tyler or Marla? Resip?
Bye the bye, this article was the biggest load of horse pucky I have read since I got a B. Madeoff's prospectus.
Here's a link to and a quote from the start of a recent David Fiderer piece. He's quite the partisan. I thought ZH was a financial website with vaguely libertarian/free market leanings, and not a vehicle for the President and all his men. Don't they have a big enough megaphone already? Think what one wants of Tea Party thinking, one thing I haven't seen is proof that it's fair to compare them to Hitler's men.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6275064
It was one of those ugly Washington stories that everybody knows about but almost nobody talks about. Joe Scarborough, to his credit, went on the record. In his 2004 Washington memoir, Rome Wasn't Burnt in a Day, Scarborough provides a chilling portrait of the man who leads FreedomWorks, the organization now promoting brownshirt disruptions at town halls across America.
Of course there's nothing "brownshirt" about left-wing disruptions at universities; disruptions designed to silence conservative speakers invited to address college students on a given topic of interest? Nah, not at all.
This is not to excuse any bad behavior on the part of Freedomworks (whatever that might be), just that "brownshirt disruptions" seems to depend on whose ox is currently being gored.
You know it easy to tell whether the mortgages were done below market. Show us your rate, and we will show you ours.
Mortgages are pretty 'personalized' to say the least. And there is nothing illegal or unethical about getting a better deal because a) you have better collateral to offer; b) you have previous associations with the bank; or c) your wife is hot.
Let me get this straight. Dodd is smart enough to write Finreg, but not smart enough to no that his position as a powerful senator he shouldn't get incredible deals from a private company?
Political figures should be penalized harsher than regular citizens because corruption within the gov't destroys confidence in the political system.
David, David, David, when you ask your readers to put any faith in the Senate "Ethics Committee" you simply demonstrate to us your naivete & lack of critical thinking skill, and so we relegate you to the trash bin. It's the first rule of writing, don't insult your reader.
I thought ZH was above blatant propaganda from either party, which you can easily get anywhere else on the web.
Worst. Post. Ever.
God knows we get it enough bullshit just flipping on the TV...
What is this, CNN? If i wanted to hear left-wing hippy bullshit id set my homepage to one of the MSMs.
issa is an arab, so he must be wrong
It's always nice to see where people stand.
Quite.
The article loses its credibility when the rant about the right wing persecuting poor little Acorn and the thug Panthers cuts loose. I suspect we are just getting part of the Countrywide story on Dodd and Frank, the two sleaziest guys in Congress.
The Acorn story was proven in court to be a fraud, and illegal (but don't let that stop you from believing the crap Glenn feeds you).
The Panther story is classic right wing BS... two guys at one poling station (what a joke, the GOP has arranged to have cops outside black poling stations many times... assuming blacks will vote Democrat, and many would rather not be asked questions by police... because, as we all know, most blacks are crooks, or worse).
And lets hear you defend "Fixed News" handling of the Shirley Sherrod story. They had the full tape last night (they knew the truth) and continued to label this amazing women a racist. The story is classic "Rove" political slime... take an tape of an amazing black women who has dedicated her entire life to helping the poor and needy (black and white, after her father was murdered by the Klan), and edit it to make her look like a "white hater"... and you just eat that garbage up... pathetic!
Your serve.
...the GOP has arranged to have cops outside black poling stations many times...
Prove it, if you can. We showed you our video, you show us yours.
A section of a 2004 report on the subject...
Amid the general ugliness of the race, though, there's one incident that Democrats in the city remember with a distinct sense of unease. The story, which was first reported by The American Prospectin February, and has since been broadcast by activist groups like MoveOn.org, goes like this: In an attempt to intimidate African-Americans and deter them from showing up at the polls, the Katz campaign, or one of its associates, put together a team of men dressed in official-looking attire -- dark suits, lapel pins bearing insignia of federal or local law-enforcement agencies -- and sent them into areas of the city with large black populations. According to Sherry Swirsky, a local antitrust attorney who is active in Democratic politics and who worked as an election monitor that day, the men carried clipboards and drove around in unmarked black vans.
"Some of them were just driving around neighborhoods, looking menacing," Swirsky recalls. "But others were going up to voters and giving them misinformation about the kind of I.D. they needed in order to vote. The truth is, you don't need any I.D. to vote. But they were telling them they needed a major credit card, a passport or driver's license. They were telling them it was risky to vote if they had any outstanding child support bills. Imagine the menacing presence of a bunch of big white guys in black cars who look like they're law-enforcement people telling you all these things."
I'll go you one better, I'll show you yours... here's the famous "thug" clip unedited. Listen to the man speak... not exactly my definition of a "thug" (of course feel free to agree with Hannity and O'Reilly's take if you wish)... could it be they were there (in a black neighborhood for heavens sake) to PREVENT voter intimidation? Why of course not... that would mean Shawn, Bill, and Rush were trying to fan the flames of racial tensions... and we all know they would never, ever do such a thing!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neGbKHyGuHU
And here is that same "thug" at a different event. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3MbqupVxMY
No, nothing intimidating about him. He was just providing security to ensure everyone could vote.
Of course, I heard about this on Fox (even though that is not the source of this clip), so it probably was created on a computer and a voice-over made by Roger Ailes to cover his actual words about how cute puppies are when they chase their tails.
The subject is voter intimidation... I didn't say he was a saint, just that there is no evidence of voter intimidation in the tape (if you watch the whole thing... sound familiar?). Intimidation is "assumed," based on the Fox commentary... "two Black Panther thugs" at a poling station... the number one story on Fox for days. Is that news, or just an opportunity to fan the flames... my money's on the latter.
This man who in the other video suggests that white babies be killed, was standing in front of a voting place in Black Panther regalia carrying a billy club. Why was he there if not for intimidation?
As to watching the full tape, perhaps Obama should have done so before having Sherrod fired (even before the tape was aired on Fox)
I suggest you bring scuba gear if you are going to keep your head in the sand....
Not really sure why you deserve a response, but I'll play ...
"The Acorn story was proven in court to be a fraud ... "
Can you cite the specific case that exonerated Acorn over the O'Keefe tapes? Cause last I heard there were well over 30 convictions on racketeering, voter fraud, subprime mortgage fraud in over 14 states ... actual court cases with actual convictions ...I can cite them all for you or you could just google "Acorn convictions" and review each individual case on a state-by-state basis ...
"the GOP has arranged to have cops outside black poling stations many times."
If this happens so often ... especially in today's day and age, I would assume it would show up on YouTube by now, you know with all the video cellphones and such ... probably some cracker cops, eating Dunkin Donuts, harrassing black folk at the polling place to vote Republican or get tased ... funny, I have never seen that video ... but I have seen the video of the Black Panther threatening to "kill crackers" and "kill cracker babies" and standing at a polling place in Philadelphia with a nightstick ...
"They had the full tape last night (they knew the truth) and continued to label this amazing women a racist."
So you must work for "Fixed News" since that is the only way you would know they "had the full tape last night" ... either that or you're another armchair blogger with an ideological bent who is making crap up on the internet like the guest poster above ... so who told you that Fox had the full tape last night? Someone at Kos, HuffPo, or another "objective" news source ...
You are clearly one who will never be convinced so I won't waste my time (misinformed on all counts, btw. OK, lets cover Acorn... Acorn was never convicted of anything... your friends published every criminal conviction of any ex Acorn staffer, and attempted to pin the issues on Acorn... which you swollowed hook, line...).
Maybe if I point out the common thread in these (and others... Reverend Wright, Black Panthers are coming to get you, Van Jones... that evil black Obama Energy advisor accused (wrongly) of being an ex felon by Fox... etc).
See it... I'm sure you do! The evil black people are coming after you Whitey... they're taking over your government, and what are we going to do about it. This is a tried and true political agenda designed to divide and conquer, and play to racist elements of the GOP base... obviously it's worked well on you.
Finally, interesting that you choose not to address the "soupe du jour"... the character assassination of Shirley Sherrod by Fox News... seems they were a little off on that one as well (what's that, she's black too... amazing coincidence).
SRV - ES339 guidelines to debate:
1. Build "racial" strawman.
2. Defend strawman with additional "racial" strawmen.
3. I can winz debate?
And like a typical liberal troll, you debate me through your personl projection of my positions as you believe them to exist by reading into nothing that I wrote, but rather what you read and see on cable news, other blogs, etc. ... a piss-poor debate tactic that means you are no longer worth response ....
Good night ... for idiots like you we need an ignore feature ...
Thanks... couldn't have described the Faux News approach better myself... and I believe I was the one that gave up as futile, any debate of these issues with you.
BTW... see comment #484041 (above) for the GOP intimidation information... you may have missed it since I don't believe Fox covered it.
Gotcha, SRV. Damn those Fox bastages for firing poor Shirley without giving her a fair hearing. Oh, sorry...
I see you got the Fox memo... after tearing her to pieces for the better part of two days (even after the true story and complete tape came out), now "The Story" is how the Dept of Ag could have gotten it so wrong... the story Fox was ranting about for two days, including public demands for her resignation!
Lost me at "honest journalist" but really a submission from a dbag at Huffpoo? What next, George Soros himself?
flag as junk(1)