Lawrence Lessig on McCain and the Keating Five scandal
Lawrence Lessig's astute comments about the Keating Five scandal.
It has surprised me that this, the tremor before this recent financial disaster, the Keating Five scandal, has not been at the center of this campaign before. But now, apparently in response to Palin's suggestion that the fact Obama knows Ayers is relevant to whether he should be president, the Obama campaign has released this very strong 15 minute documentary about the Keating scandal. For those not old enough to remember, here's the outline: 5 Senators, all of whom had received campaign funding from Charles Keating, intervene with regulators to get them to overlook criminal behavior by Keating, leading to the collapse of Lincoln Savings, leading to a $3.4 billion bill for Americans. The only one of those 5 Senators to receive both personal and political benefits from Keating: McCain. Fair? Totally relevant to the question whether the judgment of this candidate is the sort that's needed at this time. Totally relevant to the basic question whether his philosophy -- deregulate -- is what this sector needs at this time. Wise? Not sure. I'm not sure Americans distinguish between hard-hitting-and-fair criticism (which this is) and hard-hitting-and-unfair criticism (which Palin's is). One might worry that they're "burn[ing] down the house to roast the pig" but I assume they've reckoned that. But ugly? You bet.and then things got ugly
the latest
latest episodes
Ahh yes, the Keating 5.
Three ended their careers in ignominy and with judicial sanction, while the other 2 (the War Hero and the Astronaut) were merely "rebuked" by the Senate.
Seems being a tool of the propagandists has it's perks.
about damn time!
This is the first presidential election I can remember during which a big chunk of people get increasingly pissed off enough to rattle poll numbers- AND I actually know people who are also pissed and are switching allegiance because of it. If I see it in my life (a liberal in the midwest surrounded by a sea of conservatives, then the polls are probably UNDERestimating the sea change toward Obama.
Which in my mind, means: people might actually see the difference this time. Perhaps for the first time ever, in some age groups.
And what happened in the end for John McCain? It was concluded by the Senate Ethics Committee that he did not deliver any special favors to Lincoln. In fact, Keating called McCain a wimp behind his back and McCain quickly tied into him for being ridiculous.
So the story you didn't hear: McCain rebuked Keating for being a scheister even though Lincoln was an active employer in his state.
blv McCn ws xnrtd.
nd vn f h wsn't, t's hrdly cmprbl t bm's lngtrm frndshp wth n nrpntnt dmstc trrrst lk yrs.
Somehow these scandals never seem to stick to conservatives. Remember the Mother Jones scathing piece "Bush Family Values" which made Geo. W. look like the criminal he is in his dealing with Spectrum, the Rangers, and scamming the SEC? Mainstream media ignored it entirely. What about the Bush syndicate ties with the Bin Laden family? Seems like these scandals are too far beyond belief to really make an impact. Too bad.
On the other hand, the mere suggestion of guilt-by-association of a liberal consumes gobs of the 24-hour news cycle.
Did mainstream media learn their lesson with the Swift-Boat attacks? Remains to be seen. One thing is for certain though: those who are constantly kvetching about the liberal media are in serious need of a reality check.
Eh. This is irrelevant. What is going to lose McCain the election isn't going to be some sort of scandal the media, or anyone else can dig up. It will be because he failed to differentiate himself from Barack Obama on the highly unpopular Wall St. Bailout. He -could- have stood for fiscal conservatism and made a political break with GW, but he didn't
as a dirty foreigner living in the United States, stealing jobs from hardworking americans, I have to say my mind has been utterly blown by the falsehoods being spread by the republican campaign.
not white lies, not a muddling of the facts, but outright blatant lies.
I don't understand how no one calls anyone out on it. I mean, sure, on blogs and even some of the media they do, but I'd love to see Obama call McCain a liar, to his face, during a debate. not "that's not right, john", but calling a spade a spade, "that is a bald-faced lie, sir". Sure, it would probably be suicide, but I think that level of honesty would be such a breath of fresh air.
we came close to that when Biden said the "maverick" thing was ridiculous, but even that wasn't forceful enough.
as it is, everyday I feel like I've taken crazy pills. post-facts society indeed.
#5 - the Keating scandal may not be comparable to the Ayers relationship. But this is:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/10/07/palins_unamerican/
I'd say the Palin's have the Obama's beat by a mile when it comes to associating with evil people.
i'm not so bothered by the ayers connection. it seems fairly tangential to me.
i am extremely concerned, however, that amongst obama's main financial advisers are franklin raines and jim johnson, who both served as the head of freddie mac for @#$ck's sake.
i'll still vote for barack, but sadly it's looking more and more like that will be because anything would be better than the night of the living dead meets hockey mom on steriods traveling *&ckshow the repubs have going on.
change we can believe in? step away from the koolaid, people.
Fox News said this was not true and the McCain camp lawyer said it never happened... so I guess it is not true. So much for the liberal media?
Obama's longterm friendship with an unrepentant domestic terrorist like Ayers.
I dont know that the Ayers-Obama thing has ever been more than just a talking point of the McCain campaign. In any event, its about the same relevance as the endless Palin trivia, which is to say useless to the point of absurdity.
#7 Nailed it here, if McCain was a real maverick he would has opposed this giant bailout and differentiated himself from Obama.
I never really liked McCain for many reasons, but after reading this article in Rolling Stone, I have immense disdain for the man. I find him absolutely repugnant. He has NO business even being a Senator, let alone the President. He sounds like a major scumbag.
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/23316912/makebelieve_maverick/print
RE McCain: Don't you think he looks tired?
Oh boy. No mention of what the investigation actually found?
http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/mccain/articles/2007/03/01/20070301mccainbio-chapter7.html
McCain was exonerated by a Democrat special counsel. And he's spent the rest of his career on measures like campaign finance
reform, trying to make up for even the appearance of impropriety.
'm nt sr tht th bm cmpgn vn ndrstnds wht's wrng wth n ssctn wth yrs. Fr ppl n tht crcl, h's jst rspctd ctvst. hstry f vlnc s chc nd dngrs. t lst n prst f sclsm. Dn't dr bmb n brtn clnc.
nd tht my b th mst llstrtv wy f vwng ths: wht f McCn hd lng prsnl nd prfssnl rltnshp wth rc Rdlph? Wld nyn vr lt s frgt t? Wld h vn b cnddt?
what's with the disemvowelling?
What do you think of those links on the Obama youtube official site to some Zeitgeist something or other. Get there by clicking the embedded video above. Looks like hacking to me.
The next person who repeats the disproven Bill Ayers meme wins an all-expenses-paid, one-week vacation from commenting privileges. And to be fair, that goes for the who's Sarah Palin's baby's mother meme, too.
Putting this out as an internet documentary is interesting.
I think perhaps the Obama campaign doesn't want to run an attack ad based on it, or give it prominent space in Obama or Biden statements, however they do want to respond to McCain's attacks in a way that does not just cause the mainstream media to repeat McCain's attacks with their idiotic he-said-she-said balance.
So a website and short film distributed on the internet that will bubble around amongst the political junkies on the internet, and which the MSM will easily find when they go through their brain dead story balancing.
It seems like it will end up rebutting McCain's claims if the MSM decides to cover that story, but Obama's campaign doesn't do anything that demands they cover it.
can we comment on Palin's connection to the treasanous (as defined in the constitution) Alaskan secessionist movement, of which there is plenty of documentary proof? how about her demonstrated connection to John Bircher Society nutballs? are those fair game?
"And what happened in the end for John McCain? It was concluded by the Senate Ethics Committee that he did not deliver any special favors to Lincoln."
Plenty of room there for a "...yet.". McCain was found by the senate to have been in the wrong place at the wrong time, with the wrong people and they put it on his Senate record by officially 'rebuking' him as an act of the Senate. That's not exonerated.
Palin's accusation is that Obama had a coffee lunch 14 years ago with a guy who was antisocial 40 years ago (when Obama was a toddler), and who has since come around somewhat, and who never did go to jail or face charges or inform on his compatriots (who, after he knew them, blew themselves up).
There's a reason Obama is up 15 points in PA as of today.
What's with the disemvowelling?
Please see the Moderation Thread
Antinous, are you forbidding discussion of Palin's children because the claims were pointless or because they were untrue?
When is someone going to point out that McCain's whole story is based on his being a screw-up. The man got shot down - he failed!!! I want a pilot that at least managed to complete his mission (get back to base with the plane) for Senator and potentially president.
Yes, I'm fucking joking but I'd still like to see someone try and get that going as a meme.
I am frankly surprised that McCain would come at Obama with the Ayers thing.....McCain's ties to G. Gordon Liddy (to name just one example) are far far worse.
Because there's absolutely no evidence to back them up. There are plenty of proven faults to criticize about the various candidates, without making up imaginary ones.
Ayers claimed responsibility for a dozen bombings between 1970 and 1974.
He was never convicted of any crime.
Obama was born August, 1961, do the math.
Ayers is now distinguished professor of education at the University of Illinois-Chicago.
They both served on the board of the Woods Fund of Chicago, an anti-poverty group, 1999 to 2002.
Ayers donated a whopping $200 to Obama's senate re-election campaign.
Oh, and they happen to live in the same Chicago neighborhood.
Gee, it sounds like Obama's friendship, if that's what it is, is with a Distinguished Professor of Education. Oh, my!
Does anyone who works with or has a neighbor who ever committed a crime, served their time and paid their debt to society "consort with criminals"? Oohhh, sounds pretty scary to me.
Oh, and remember that something like one person in a hundred in The U.S. has served time, so yeah, odds are pretty good you know one or work with one. Tsk, tsk.
@PSTARR
i am extremely concerned, however, that amongst obama's main financial advisers are franklin raines and jim johnson
Don't know about Johnson, but the Raines thing is definitely a lie.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/09/obamas_fannie_mae_connection.html
Should make you wonder about whatever else you've internalized as fact about him, shouldn't it? Just sayin'.
Jim Johnson was going to run Obama's VP search before he got caught up in the "Friends of Angelo" Countrywide mortgage scandal. He was in charge of Fanny Mae from 1991-1998. See Wikipedia for more details.
#28
my bad - thought i had done enough due diligence after being forwarded an email that i actually didn't believe from my dad (hardcore right winger), which speaks to how easily it is to be misled out there in the tubes.
found this, though:
If the McCain campaign had wanted to make more of point in the “Advice” ad he would have mentioned former Obama advisor and intially a member of his Vice-Presidential selection committee Jim Johnson, another ex-CEO of Fannie Mae. Johnson resigned from the VP selection committee after it was discovered he may have gotten a favorable mortgage deal from CountryWide Mortgage - an early casualty or the mortgage melt-down. By all accounts Johnson, as a major donation bundler for the Obama campaign, has much closer ties to the Democratic nominee than Raines could ever hope to have.
http://sharpynews.com/politics/blog/red-politics-news/ex-fannie-ceo-raines-not-obama-advisor/
i do wonder about the "facts" flying around, a lot. the truth is pretty hard to get to, especially when it's wrapped up in so many layers of rhetoric and posturing and self-aggrandizing. and while i do think obama will do a much better job than mccain or bush, he's not going to save the world.
Faxtoid: From Wikepedia and alternative sites: McCain was not described as this video relates. The twisting in itself make little sense to the average person.
Actual infor:
Glenn and McCain: cleared of impropriety but criticized for poor judgment
The Senate Ethics Committee ruled that the involvement of Glenn in the scheme was minimal, and the charges against him were dropped.[47] He was only criticized by the Committee for "poor judgment."[50]
The Ethics Committee ruled that the involvement of McCain in the scheme was also minimal, and he too was cleared of all charges against him.[48][47] McCain was criticized by the Committee for exercising "poor judgment" when he met with the federal regulators on Keating's behalf.[7] The report also said that McCain's "actions were not improper nor attended with gross negligence and did not reach the level of requiring institutional action against him....Senator McCain has violated no law of the United States or specific Rule of the United States Senate."[51] On his Keating Five experience, McCain has said: "The appearance of it was wrong. It's a wrong appearance when a group of senators appear in a meeting with a group of regulators, because it conveys the impression of undue and improper influence. And it was the wrong thing to do."[7]
Regardless of the level of their involvement, both senators were greatly affected by it. McCain would write in 2002 that attending the two April 1987 meetings was "the worst mistake of my life".[52] Glenn has described the Senate Ethics Committee investigation as the low point of his life.[8]
The Senate Ethics Committee did not pursue, for lack of jurisdiction, any possible ethics breaches in McCain's delayed reimbursements to Keating for trips at the latter's expense, because they occurred while McCain was in the House.[49] The House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct said that it too lacked jurisdiction, because McCain was no longer in the House.[53] It said it did not require that McCain amend his existing financial disclosure forms for his House years, on the grounds that McCain had now fully reimbursed Keating's company.[53]
who is worth convincing McCain is bad? Any with eyes to see already know, the dead-enders are just that - is there actually a significant on the fence voting bloc worth trying to influence?
The those possibly hacked links to Zeitgeist have been removed from the Obama youtube site. Did anyone else see them? Or was that just my fevered imagination?
I like that the Obama campaign is playing relative hardball with this video.
JimKirk @ 27
Oh, and remember that something like one person in a hundred in The U.S. has served time, so yeah, odds are pretty good you know one or work with one.
Actually something over one adult in a hundred in the USA is serving time right now.
Per the DOJ (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/crimoff.htm), as of 2001
- an estimated 2.7% of adults in the U.S. had served time in prison
- If recent incarceration rates remain unchanged, an estimated 1 of every 15 persons (6.6%) will serve time in a prison during their lifetime.
I think the incarceration rates have increased somewhat, so it will probably be higher than that...
I wonder how much nastier this campaign will get before the end. 1988 all over again?
I don't really get what the Senators are supposed to have done. But it sounds like what we in Sweden call ministerstyre. The Swedish political and jurisdictional system is very different from that in USA, and those kinds of things are near impossible to happen here.
The Swedish laws against ministerstyre also means that you can't "write your senator", to be exempt from rules and regulations. They only have the power to change laws and regulations, not to influence any particular case.