Obama bin Laden? Senator addresses AP luncheon

Presidential hopeful Barack Obama addressed the American Society of Newspaper Editors and the Newspaper Association of America at the Associated Press annual luncheon. Obama's speech took full advantage of his trademark public speaking skills. More critical of his democratic opponent Hillary Clinton in his opening statement than attendees of the luncheon might have expected, Obama talked about how he was not born into any amount of wealth and understood what it took for an American to work hard to succeed.

Obama was critical of the Bush Administration's tax cuts for the wealthy. Addressing the issue of Republican presidential candidate John McCain saying he was "out of touch" with the American people, Obama said that McCain was using his words against him and that he would "like to have" a debate with McCain over who was better able to relate to the American people.

Far and away, the most surprising moment of the luncheon came when the speech moderator accidentally referred to Osama bin Laden as "Obama bin Laden." Addressing a sincerely shocked audience, Obama coolly

corrected the moderator then noted this was not the first time he had heard such a misstatement.

Also, Obama said John McCain was running for "George Bush's third term" and that he was the candidate running "for the American people." McCain, said Obama, did not understand how to solve the foreclosure crisis sweeping through America.

Stressing he wanted to get the public more involved in politics should he become President, Obama said that our country needed to find a balance between protecting individual liberties and protecting our security regarding the Shield Law and FISA.

When addressing the fact that he is often labeled as being "too liberal," Senator Obama said he ran on a platform that is not liberal nor conservative, but one that is focused on uniting society to solve problems. Obama described Hillary Clinton as a "formidable" opponent, and said her reluctance to withdraw from the presidential candidacy race helped attract interest in each campaign and was actually good for the Democratic party.

Senator McCain delivers enthusiastic address at Associated Press luncheon

Presidential hopeful John McCain (R-AZ) spoke at the Associated Press Annual Meeting today, answering a wide variety of questions concerning everything from his relationship with the press to his stances on the war and ideas about restoring the sagging American economy.

McCain talked about how he hoped to build a strong relationship with the press, who he said often misinterpret his statements. Regarding the Shield Law, McCain said he felt the public should know what goes on behind "closed doors" by government officials, but at the same time laws and courts should outline what information can and cannot be released. Speaking to a group of reporters obviously concerned about such free- speech issues, the Senator said anything that could potentially allow Islamic radicals to have an advantage against us should be questioned.


McCain was asked if he thought one of his democratic opponents, Senator Barack Obama, was an "elitist." McCain responded by saying that he did not know Obama well enough to make such an assessment, but that the Senator's viewpoints are "fundamentally different" than his and not necessarily correct.

On the topic of America's economic situation, McCain was asked if he thought America was in a recession. McCain said he "certainly thought so," but that he was not concerned with terminology- he all he needed to know that "Americans are hurting," and that something has to be done to repair our economy. Describing himself as a "Teddy Roosevelt Republican" McCain explained that he thought there was a "role for the government" in business.

McCain said he would be "bothered" if he received votes based solely on the color of his skin, being that Obama is black. McCain emphasized that he would win voters over with his stances on critical issues, and did not feel he would lose voters due to his age.

Conference Call compares House and Senate housing relief tax packages

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities held a conference call today to compare the House and Senate housing relief tax packages. Call participants voiced their concerns about the lack of success both chambers of Congress have had to date in helping families decimated by the crisis concerning housing foreclosures and subprime mortgage rates.

Call participants discussed how the packages Congress has implemented to address the growing rate of housing foreclosures facing Americans “don’t meet the needs” of families seeking government aid. The discussion also focused on the importance of providing struggling families with tax credit, something the Senate bill does not address. Policy analyst Aviva Aron-Dine discussed how there are too many provisions that the relief package bills include (particularly the Senate version) that do not have anything to do with the housing crisis. Call participants explained that tax cuts the bills include for the wealthy are of no assistance to the poor who do not benefit from them.

Aron-Dine described the Senate bill as “extremely disappointing” and noted that while the House version is better, it still does not go far enough toward helping families in dire need of governmental aid. Aron-Dine explained that 60% of the Senate bill has nothing to do with helping solve the foreclosure problem. Call hosts also interestingly noted that forclosures destroy community life as well as family life, and that people renting homes have been affected by the crisis as well.

Hoyer highlights economy, war at pen and pad

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer met with the media this afternoon to discuss recent House proceedings at his regular “pen and pad” briefing.

Topics covered during the briefing were wide-spanning, ranging from the highly debated Colombia free trade agreement, to what the House is doing to improve the sagging American economy. Hoyer mentioned the effects the “significant” testimonies of General Petreaus and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker had on Capitol Hill, and emphasized that Congress is doing everything in their power to help fix our country’s financial woes.

Hoyer talked about how he found it imperative we improve our military readiness, should catastrophe arise. When questioned about a second stimulus package, the Majority Leader noted that he did not want to see one passed that was not properly financed.

"What, me worry?"

By Ellen Ratner

Next to George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, probably the next most familiar face in America is that of Mad Magazine's Alfred E. Newman. His one liner, "What, me worry?" became famous at a time when the Cold War threatened to go hot, and most people were worried about a 20-megaton Soviet hydrogen bomb coming soon to a city near them. Thus, "What, me worry? was the ultimate parody of the 1950s and 60s: Nuclear war? "What, me worry?" An African-American couldn't get a cup of coffee at a Woolworth's lunch counter? "What, me worry?" Prescribe thalidomide for morning sickness? "What, me worry?"

Although Alfred never went away, "What, me worry?" has an encore engagement in the same theater as the last time – Washington, D.C. You can boil down the elaborate reassurances to one phrase: "What, me worry?" Secretary Henry Paulson on the subprime mortgage collapse: "What, me worry?" George Bush on the imminent recession: "What, me worry?" Fed Chairman Ben Bernacke on "Honey, I shrunk the dollar": "What, me worry?" In fact, whether it's the looming bankruptcy of the American airline industry, a conviction in the bond market that inflation is the main enemy, gold at $1,000 per ounce or oil at $110 per barrel, Washington is like an aviary, chirping away with "What, me worry?" The fact that tens of millions of Americans are already suffering, or are terrified at the prospect of economic decline doesn't seem to have occurred to anybody.

Our economy is beset by malignant cancer, and it's as if bland, stupid reassurances are somehow a substitute for an honest diagnosis and a tough-love cure. This country has traveled so far from a culture of candor that today, we would probably dismiss FDR's famous "Fireside Chats" as scaremongering. Think of today's phrases: Assurances that "the fundamental underpinnings of the financial system are sound," that economic disaster is really no more than a "bump in the road," that the declining dollar is really "good" for us, (translation: good for the National Association of Manufacturers) and that a caring political class is sending in the cavalry in the form of a $600 rebate (a powerful stimulus indeed – in the year 1850).

However, in between the bromides, palliatives and political Prozac, a few disturbing facts can still pierce one's skull. Try these: This week we learned that in the next two years there could be as many as 3.3 million new home foreclosures. You can add to that the 1.3 million homes in foreclosure in 2007 (nearly double the 2006 rate). You do the math: With an adult population of approximately 220 million and a 65 to 69 percent home ownership rate, more than 6 million adults may be losing their homes. Six million adults, and who knows how many children? And people wonder why Barack Obama, thought by some as the most liberal U.S. senator, is so popular.



Congress and White House plans for dealing with this amount to little more than, "What, me worry?" While some Democrats want to give $400 billion to help people stay in their homes, most others – and Republicans, of course – shout about a "government giveaway" and the old "lack of personal responsibility." Odd, isn't it? No one asked about personal responsibility when it came to bailing out Bear Stearns, or providing billions and billions in liquidity to financial markets in the Fed's famous, "No Fat-Cat Left Behind" program. At least when Chrysler was bailed out years ago, there were tens of thousands of manufacturing jobs at stake. What was at stake here? Goldman Sachs' investment in Collateralized Debt Obligations, or CDOs? Well, whoopy-doo!

There is more bad news coming: Credit card debt defaults and more problems with CDOs. Meanwhile, only two job sectors have shown much growth: Education and medical care. As a country, we better be able to grow more than these if we expect to compete with China, India, the EU and Russia.

Instead of "What, me worry?" the real question is "What the hell should we do?" What can we do? First, we need a little candor. There are no good options available right now. The U.S. government must act now to prevent the housing/mortgage crises from going into a free fall. It must address the credit problem both individual and business levels. And it must do these things with the same fervor that FDR brought to the early years of his administration. No, we are not –yet – in a depression. But we must act now to avoid the possibility of one. Here are two suggestions:

Fix the crumbling infrastructure: Repair schools, roads and bridges; develop high-speed trains, national fiber-optic and Internet systems. This puts government money in the hands of working people and those who employ them.

Create an NRA program for real "green-collar" jobs. We've got the brains and brawn to address global warming and create products that can be exported. Just like steel, automobiles and railroads were to 20th century, so green technology, nuclear power and climate healthy production and consumption processes will be to the 21st century. And we've got an edge here because the early development economies like China, India and Russia aren't paying sufficient attention.

Talk is cheap. Suffering is real. And "What, me worry?" is a lie.