Keating 5 ring a bell?

[FOTD]

For tIPsy and Conman!
Rosa Brooks:
Keating 5 ring a bell?

McCain's past collides with the present Wall Street debacle.


http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-brooks25-2008sep25,0,5467109.column

September 25, 2008

"Once upon a time, a politician took campaign contributions and favors from a friendly constituent who happened to run a savings and loan association. The contributions were generous: They came to about $200,000 in today's dollars, and on top of that there were several free vacations for the politician and his family, along with private jet trips and other perks. The politician voted repeatedly against congressional efforts to tighten regulation of S&Ls, and in 1987, when he learned that his constituent's S&L was the target of a federal investigation, he met with regulators in an effort to get them to back off.

That politician was John McCain, and his generous friend was Charles Keating, head of Lincoln Savings & Loan. While he was courting McCain and other senators and urging them to oppose tougher regulation of S&Ls, Keating was also investing his depositors' federally insured savings in risky ventures. When those lost money, Keating tried to hide the losses from regulators by inducing his customers to switch from insured accounts to uninsured (and worthless) bonds issued by Lincoln's near-bankrupt parent company. In 1989, it went belly up -- and more than 20,000 Lincoln customers saw their savings vanish.

Keating went to prison, and McCain's Senate career almost ended. Together with the rest of the so-called Keating Five -- Sens. Alan Cranston (D-Calif.), John Glenn (D-Ohio), Don Riegle (D-Mich.) and Dennis DeConcini (D-Ariz.), all of whom had also accepted large donations from Keating and intervened on his behalf -- McCain was investigated by the Senate Ethics Committee and ultimately reprimanded for "poor judgment."

But the savings and loan crisis mushroomed. Eventually, the government spent about $125 billion in taxpayer dollars to bail out hundreds of failed S&Ls that, like Keating's, fell victim to a combination of private-sector greed and the "poor judgment" of politicians like McCain.

The $125 billion seems like small change compared to the $700-billion price tag for the Bush administration's proposed Wall Street bailout. But the root causes of both crises are the same: a lethal mix of deregulation and greed.
Today's meltdown began when unscrupulous mortgage lenders pushed naive borrowers to sign up for loans they couldn't afford to pay back. The original lenders didn't care: They pocketed the upfront fees and quickly sold the loans to others, who sold them to others still. With the government MIA, soon mortgage-backed securities were zipping around the globe. But by the time many ordinary people began to struggle to make their mortgage payments, the numerous "good" loans (held by borrowers able to pay) had gotten hopelessly mixed up with the bad loans. Investors and banks started to panic about being left with the hot potato -- securities backed mainly by worthless loans. And so began the downward spiral of a credit crunch, short-selling, stock sell-offs and bankruptcies.

Could all this have been prevented? Sure. It's not rocket science: A sensible package of regulatory reforms -- like those Barack Obama has been pushing since well before the current meltdown began -- could have kept this most recent crisis from escalating, just as maintaining reasonable regulatory regimes for S&Ls in the '80s could have prevented that crisis (McCain learned this the hard way).

But, despite his political near-death experience as a member of the Keating Five, McCain continued to champion deregulation, voting in 2000, for instance, against federal regulation of the kind of financial derivatives at the heart of today's crisis.

Shades of the Keating Five scandal don't end there. This week, for instance, news broke that until August, the lobbying firm owned by McCain campaign manager Rick Davis was paid $15,000 a month by Freddie Mac, one of the mortgage giants implicated in the current crisis (now taken over by the government and under investigation by the FBI). Apparently, Freddie Mac's plan was to gain influence with McCain's campaign in hopes that he would help shield it from pesky government regulations. And until very recently, Freddie Mac executives probably figured money paid to Davis' firm was money well spent. "I'm always in favor of less regulation," McCain told the Wall Street Journal in March.

These days, McCain is singing a different tune.

"There are no atheists in foxholes and no ideologues in financial crises," Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke said last week, explaining the sudden mass conversion of so many onetime free marketeers into champions of robust government intervention. Fair enough. But as you try to figure out what and who can get us out of this mess, beware of those who now embrace regulation with the fervor of new converts. "

rbrooks@latimescolumnists.com

[Conan71]

Wow, where did you find this obscure piece of information?  I never heard this before.  I'll definitely vote for the smart, happy, young black guy now, FOTD.

"McCain was investigated by the Senate Ethics Committee and ultimately reprimanded for "poor judgment."

Nothing to see here folks, move along.  FOTD can't find any redeeming qualities to share about Obama, so he continues to try and tear down McCain.

[thetysonwynn]

As Ann Coulter made explicitly clear in today's column, McCain may have been investigated as part of the Keating 5 debacle, but he was also EXHONERATED. I don't want to give anyone a stroke by quoting her whole column, but a pertinent quote addresses Democrat attorney Bob Bennett, who investigated McCain's involvement in the Keating 5, is this:

quote: In February this year, on Fox News' "Hannity and Colmes," Bennett said, for the eight billionth time:  

"First, I should tell your listeners I'm a registered Democrat, so I'm not on (McCain's) side of a lot of issues. But I investigated John McCain for a year and a half, at least, when I was special counsel to the Senate Ethics Committee in the Keating Five. ... And if there is one thing I am absolutely confident of, it is John McCain is an honest man. I recommended to the Senate Ethics Committee that he be cut out of the case, that there was no evidence against him."  

Attack him if he's done something, but lay off when a person has been investigated and found not to have been at fault.

Read the whole column, if you dare, here.

[FOTD]

quote:Originally posted by thetysonwynn

As Ann Coulter made explicitly clear in today's column, McCain may have been investigated as part of the Keating 5 debacle, but he was also EXHONERATED. I don't want to give anyone a stroke by quoting her whole column, but a pertinent quote addresses Democrat attorney Bob Bennett, who investigated McCain's involvement in the Keating 5, is this:

quote: In February this year, on Fox News' "Hannity and Colmes," Bennett said, for the eight billionth time:  

"First, I should tell your listeners I'm a registered Democrat, so I'm not on (McCain's) side of a lot of issues. But I investigated John McCain for a year and a half, at least, when I was special counsel to the Senate Ethics Committee in the Keating Five. ... And if there is one thing I am absolutely confident of, it is John McCain is an honest man. I recommended to the Senate Ethics Committee that he be cut out of the case, that there was no evidence against him."  

Attack him if he's done something, but lay off when a person has been investigated and found not to have been at fault.

Read the whole column, if you dare, here.

McSame looks cowardice when it comes to politics.

EXHONERATED?....what's that? another word for "POOR JUDGMENT?"

[thetysonwynn]

Just an FYI: If you're going to put it in bold, large font, all caps, you might want to spell it correctly. It's judgment.

As far as continuing to believe McCain was part of the Keating 5 when the Democrat who investigated him says he was clean, there's not much I or anyone can do to change a mind that is so obviously opposed to the truth. All the candidates have enough faults to exploit without having to dwell on an issue that is non-existent.

[rwarn17588]

quote:Originally posted by thetysonwynn

Just an FYI: If you're going to put it in bold, large font, all caps, you might want to spell it correctly. It's judgment.

That's rich. Especially when you misspelled "exonerated" in a previous post.

[Hometown]

I worked on the Lincoln Savings documents at my first law firm back on Park Avenue.  Later the firm was hit with a $50M penalty for the work they did.  It was the largest penalty levied against a law firm up to that point.  Maybe that record may still stands.

[FOTD]

For Conan and his new sock puppet thetysonwynn.

Fox host tells guest mentioning McCain role in Keating Five scandal to 'pipe down'

cuts his mike?

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Fox_host_tells_guest_mentioning_Keating_0925.html

Landlside headed your way! Better watch out.....
Faux News, you are the History Channel to the 9% who still support BushCo.

[Hoss]

quote:Originally posted by FOTD

For Conan and his new sock puppet thetysonwynn.

Fox host tells guest mentioning McCain role in Keating Five scandal to 'pipe down'

cuts his mike?

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Fox_host_tells_guest_mentioning_Keating_0925.html

Landlside headed your way! Better watch out.....
Faux News, you are the History Channel to the 9% who still support BushCo.

You gotta remember this is the same network with BillO and his famous 'cut the mike' tactics.

Doofy's a lightweight wanting to be primetime.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by FOTD

For Conan and his new sock puppet thetysonwynn.

Fox host tells guest mentioning McCain role in Keating Five scandal to 'pipe down'

cuts his mike?

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Fox_host_tells_guest_mentioning_Keating_0925.html

Landlside headed your way! Better watch out.....
Faux News, you are the History Channel to the 9% who still support BushCo.

What did you say?  You're an Obama cock-puppet?

[}:)]

[thetysonwynn]

First, I didn't missspell anything.

Second, I am no one's puppet. Just because someone is on the other side of a debate does not make them someone's puppet. For the record, I don't even know Conan.

I have many issues with McCain, and I have had for years. However, since my choice this year boils down to Obama or McCain, I take McCain. Out of basic fairness, people should not attribute misdeeds to a candidate when they have been exonerated. There simply wasn't anything there to get McCain on in the Keating 5 thing, or they would have.

[FOTD]

quote:Originally posted by thetysonwynn

First, I didn't missspell anything.

Second, I am no one's puppet. Just because someone is on the other side of a debate does not make them someone's puppet. For the record, I don't even know Conan.

I have many issues with McCain, and I have had for years. However, since my choice this year boils down to Obama or McCain, I take McCain. Out of basic fairness, people should not attribute misdeeds to a candidate when they have been exonerated. There simply wasn't anything there to get McCain on in the Keating 5 thing, or they would have.

Another meaningless vote casted in Dumbf*ckistan by someome who favors the stupid old crazy angry white guy over the black elitist muslim educated guy.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by thetysonwynn

First, I didn't missspell anything.

Second, I am no one's puppet. Just because someone is on the other side of a debate does not make them someone's puppet. For the record, I don't even know Conan.

I have many issues with McCain, and I have had for years. However, since my choice this year boils down to Obama or McCain, I take McCain. Out of basic fairness, people should not attribute misdeeds to a candidate when they have been exonerated. There simply wasn't anything there to get McCain on in the Keating 5 thing, or they would have.

Either you mistyped or lied:

"As Ann Coulter made explicitly clear in today's column, McCain may have been investigated as part of the Keating 5 debacle, but he was also EXHONERATED.

Anyone who would give Coulter the digity of reading her work? I go with the lie.

Same thing with McCain. Exonerated was not a word that applied. He tried to pressure the regulators who were looking into the S&L mess at the request of some sleazebags. His efforts caught their attention and they assumed he was involved deeper than he was. He didn't cheat, he just helped people who did. They couldn't prove he was a player so they let him off easy, you know war hero and all....

[thetysonwynn]

I simply did not misspell anything. I refuse to look at any evidence you might show me that might indicate that I did. Further, if I look at the evidence, I refuse to accept it, regardless of how overwhelming it is.

Pretty untenable isn't it? That is precisely what some of you here are doing in regards to the Keating 5 incident.

I did not quote Miss Coulter, as I know she causes something akin to Bush derangement syndrome with some of you. I did, however, quote the Democrat counsel who investigated him and said, in short, there was nothing there. Further, even if it was gleaned from an Ann Coulter column, truth does not magically morph into fiction because you don't like the person quoting it.

You can choose to continue to believe he was guilty with all your heart. It does not make him guilty.

I was making a point, and if you want to call that a lie, you are welcome to do so. There's no use debating with people who are not reasonable; I'm through. Which, I believe, is what you wanted. Merry Christmas.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by thetysonwynn

I simply did not misspell anything. I refuse to look at any evidence you might show me that might indicate that I did. Further, if I look at the evidence, I refuse to accept it, regardless of how overwhelming it is.

Pretty untenable isn't it? That is precisely what some of you here are doing in regards to the Keating 5 incident.

I did not quote Miss Coulter, as I know she causes something akin to Bush derangement syndrome with some of you. I did, however, quote the Democrat counsel who investigated him and said, in short, there was nothing there. Further, even if it was gleaned from an Ann Coulter column, truth does not magically morph into fiction because you don't like the person quoting it.

You can choose to continue to believe he was guilty with all your heart. It does not make him guilty.

I was making a point, and if you want to call that a lie, you are welcome to do so. There's no use debating with people who are not reasonable; I'm through. Which, I believe, is what you wanted. Merry Christmas.

Relax. No one wants you to leave. Least not me. I lived through the S&L fiasco and recently refreshed my memory by reading some old articles. I didn't say he was guilty of anything. From what I can tell it was exactly as I posted above. He hung out with some bad guys who used him and almost got him in trouble. He was not found guilty of a crime but as the feds noted, some used some really bad judgement. It was by his own admission a mistake to do so.

Bad judgement. Kind of like mentioning Coulter in literate circles.[]