Obama vs Palin – These Cartoons Say It All


Sarah Palin cartoon

Lol! And here’s another one, from The Ryskind Sketchbook:

Sarah Palin cartoon

And more and more:

Sarah Palin cartoon

Sarah Palin cartoon

Sarah Palin cartoon

Sarah Palin cartoon

Wah kah ka ka ka ka! But honestly, Senator ‘143 Days’ loses out to Palin’s 2 terms as Mayor of Wasilla and 2 years as Governor of Alaska – let alone John McCain!

Cartoons from hundred-plus collection at Sarah Palin Tribute Editorial Cartoons.

See the following for a fleshing out of what the cartoon implies:


Tags: , , ,

19 Responses to “Obama vs Palin – These Cartoons Say It All”

  1. hutchrun Says:

    How ‘community organizers’ (like Obama) created the Subprime crisis
    By Jerry Bowyer

    I wrote to you previously (Meet Barry Obama, ‘Fair Housing’ Lawyer) about the Community Reinvestment Act, a law which compels banks to make home loans in minority neighborhoods to people who were poor credit risks. Although the CRA is well known in the financial industry, political pundits and reporters often know very little about finance and so have missed this extremely important aspect of the story. Ignorance of economics doesn’t help much either. The political class seems blissfully unaware of the concept of unintended consequences which is the idea that laws which are designed to make our lives better often make our lives worse.

    On a recent edition of Kudlow and Company, I debated Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders on precisely this point. He seemed not only to disagree with my point that if congress compels banks to make Subprime loans, then they share responsibility for the crisis that results when the borrowers default; he seemed not to understand it. For him once we identify the target group as bankers, nothing else matters — they’re bad and he’s good, no more reasoning is necessary.

    It’s not just Congress that’s responsible. Yes, they forged the weapons, but some army needed to wield them. That’s where guys like Barry Obama came in to the picture. When Barry (who was gradually changing his name to Barack around this time) graduated from Columbia, he took a brief stint as a researcher writing for a corporate consulting firm. According to his memoirs he thought of himself as ‘a spy’ who was dropped ‘behind enemy lines.’ Shortly thereafter, he left the enemy territory of corporate America and moved to a job about which he could feel proud — he went to work for the New York branch of the Public Interest Research Group. PIRG is one of those left of center activist groups who, among other things, uses the legitimate concept of ‘fair housing’ to force banks into making bad loans. PIRG has actively lobbied for a stronger (yes, you guessed it) Community Reinvestment Act.

    http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/bowyer/080408

  2. hutchrun Says:

    Harry Reid: Congress goes home because “no one knows what to do”
    Democratic “leadership”. Anybody still wonders why Congress has a 9% approval rating?

    http://eye-on-the-world.blogspot.com/2008/09/harry-reid-congress-goes-home-because.html

  3. hutchrun Says:

    Harry Reid: Congress goes home because “no one knows what to do”
    Democratic “leadership”. Anybody still wonders why Congress has a 9% approval rating?

    eye-on-the-world.blogspot.com/2008/09/harry-reid-congress-goes-home-because.html

  4. Scott Thong Says:

    Add this list of Democrat involvement in the mortgage crisis to your reading as well.

  5. jezb1 Says:

    I don’t think the Democrats are alone in this one. Let’s take a look at the Republican’s involvement by starting with the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, the bill that ultimately repealed the Glass-Steagall Act.

    The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act was introduced in the Senate by Phil Gramm (R-TX) and in the House of Representatives by James Leach (R-IA) in 1999. The bills were passed by a 54-44 vote along party lines with Republican support in the Senate and by a 343-86 vote in the House of Representatives. Nov 4, 1999: After passing both the Senate and House the bill was moved to a conference committee to work out the differences between the Senate and House versions. The final bill resolving the differences was passed in the Senate 90-8-1 and in the House: 362-57-15. This veto proof legislation was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999.

    The banking industry had been seeking the repeal of Glass-Steagall since at least the 1980s. In 1987 the Congressional Research Service prepared a report which explored the case for preserving Glass-Steagall and the case against preserving the act.

    The repeal enabled commercial lenders such as Citigroup, the largest U.S. bank by assets, to underwrite and trade instruments such as mortgage-backed securities and collateralized debt obligations and establish so-called structured investment vehicles, or SIVs, that bought those securities. Citigroup played a major part in the repeal. Then called Citicorp, the company merged with Travelers Insurance company the year before using loopholes in Glass-Steagall that allowed for temporary exemptions. With lobbying led by Roger Levy, the “finance, insurance and real estate industries together are regularly the largest campaign contributors and biggest spenders on lobbying of all business sectors [in 1999]. They laid out more than $200 million for lobbying in 1998, according to the Center for Responsive Politics…” These industries succeeded in their two decades long effort to repeal the act.

    And now, the government is bailing out alot of these companies who are failing as a result of their risky behavior…

    That seems a little too socialistic, doesn’t it?

    If you’ll recall, Phil Gramm was also McCain’s Chief Economic Advisor until this past July. Phil Gramm also got the “Enron Loophole” written into the 2000 Commodities Futures Modernization Act that exempted from regulation energy trading on electronic platforms. His wife Wendy Gramm sat on the board of ENRON while it was manipulating California’s power grid (shutting down substations) to create short supplies of electricity in order to drive up prices. This was the opening for Enron to artificially inflate it’s stock price…. and then it’s eventual demise.

  6. Mattheson Says:

    How a Bill Becomes a Law
    A Constitution Day lesson for the DailyKos Kidz.
    By JAMES TARANTO

    In yesterday’s column we noted that some supporters of Barack Obama, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, were blaming the current crisis in the financial industry on the 1999 Graham-Leach-Bliley Act, a law whose chief Senate sponsor was then-Sen. Phil Gramm, who until July was an adviser to John McCain’s presidential campaign. (The chief House sponsor was then-Rep. Jim Leach, now co-founder of Republicans for Obama.)

    This was curious, we noted, since Graham-Leach-Bliley passed the Senate on a 90-8 vote, with both Reid and Obama running mate Joe Biden casting “aye” votes. One Andre Neil, a contributor to the Angry Left Web site DailyKos.com, thought he had caught us in an error–or, as he put it, “James Taranto is a liar. The Wall Street Journal just allowed one of its staff to perpetuate a blatant lie on its behalf.” There followed a flood of angry spam from dozens of DailyKos readers; to get a sense of the tone, click on Neil’s name and peruse the comments.

    Trouble is, it is Neil who has misled his readers. He claims that the page to which we linked “is not a transcript to the roll call for the bill”:

    This is. It took place on May 6, 1999. The page that Taranto linked to was a vote on the conference report, which took place 6 months after the bill had already passed in the senate, and just over a week before it was signed into law. The bill was not passed 90-8; it was passed 54-44, almost strictly down party lines.

    Neil and most of his readers do not seem to know what a conference report is. As a public service on this Constitution Day, we therefore present a lesson for DailyKos readers (and anyone else who could use a refresher) in How a Bill Becomes a Law:

    America has what is known as a bicameral (two-chamber) legislature. In order for a bill to become a law, it must command a majority of voting members in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. A bill that has the support of only one chamber is a legal nullity. This much you could have learned by watching “Schoolhouse Rock,” which seems to be where the Kos Kidz’ education ended. In real life, though, things are a bit more complicated.

    The way the process works is that before voting on a bill, each chamber debates it separately, considering and voting on amendments (changes) introduced by members. The result in many cases is that by the time the House and Senate each vote on a bill, it become two different bills: one that passed the House and one that passed the Senate. Since each bill has passed only one chamber of Congress, neither one can become a law.

    Enter the conference committee. This is a group of representatives and senators who meet to hash out the differences between the House and Senate bills. They produce a compromise: a bill on which both houses vote, so that it can become a law. The bill that actually becomes a law is known as a “conference report.”

    This is what happened with Gramm-Leach-Bliley. The Senate-only version of the bill did pass on May 6, 1999 by a near-party-line vote of 54-44. The House-only version passed, 343-86, on July 1. Neither of these bills, however, became a law. The bill that did become a law–the law about which Sen. Reid and others are complaining now–was the conference report, the bill the Senate approved by 90-8 on Nov. 4. The House passed it the same day, 362-57.

    Neil seems to have mistakenly thought that the “conference report” was a mere procedural action, when in fact it was a vote on actual legislation. One of his readers tried to clear up his confusion but failed, as evidenced by Neil’s response:

    Update 3: I’m seeing a lot of comments about the significance of Democrats having voted for the Conference Report. I’ll just go ahead and repost my reply to robertacker13:

    “The Conference Report is nothing but an editing session. During the session, a a team picked from both the House and Senate meet in order to reconcile differences between the versions of the bills already passed in both chambers. This is the reason it took from May until November to get the bill passed. This is the reason GLBA passed that 4 November vote with such an overwhelming majority–it had already been approved in both houses, and the only formality left was for language to be amended by the conferees.

    The 4 November vote was not a vote on the merits of the bill. It was a vote on the language of the bill.

    Blocking the conference report does not kill a vote. Even if the report was voted against by every last Democrat, it was going to get pushed through anyway.”

    In fact, had the Senate voted down the conference report, the legislation would have been dead, since the bill that previously passed the Senate was different from the one that passed the House. Neil’s distinction between the “merits” and “language” of the bill lacks any basis in reality. A bill and its language are one and the same thing.

    Moreover, Neil errs in implying that the Republicans could have passed Gramm-Leach-Bliley without Democratic help. It is true that the Republicans held majorities in both congressional chambers in 1999. Yet as hard as it may be to believe now, the president, Bill Clinton, was a Democrat. It was Clinton’s signature that made the bill a law. Clinton could have refused to sign (“That’s called a veto,” as “Schoolhouse Rock” teaches).

    In that case, it would have taken a two-thirds vote in both houses to make the bill a law–which means the votes of 34 Democratic senators would have been sufficient to block the legislation. Between May and November, 37 Democrats, including Reid and Biden, switched from opposing Gramm-Leach-Bliley to supporting it. Had 27 or more of them stood their ground, their numbers would have been sufficient to sustain a veto.

    In fairness to Neil and the other Kos Kidz, it’s probably true that hardly anyone knows what a conference report is. Yet while their ignorance may be excusable, the self-righteousness and bluster with which they express it ought to embarrass even Markos Moulitsas.

    Several readers called to our attention two other points relevant to our item yesterday. First, it seems Peter Fitzgerald, the Republican who preceded Obama in the Senate, voted “present” because his father was in the banking business and thus the senator believed it was a conflict of interest for him to vote on legislation affecting the industry.

    Second, without Gramm-Leach-Bliley, which abolished the barrier between commercial and investment banking, the recent deals that saved Bear Stearns and Merrill Lynch would have been impossible, since both of them involved a commercial bank acquiring a troubled investment bank.

  7. Heavenly Says:

    Off topic, sorry……

    I love how McCain pointed out that Obama is Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac second highest contributors, but didn’t mention about himself.

    I hate baring bad news but John McCain also to money from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and also a larger amount than Barack Obama

    2008 Campaign Contributions from Fannie & Freddie
    John McCain- $169,000
    Barack Obama- $16,000

    read the NYTimes and click on the Multimedia graphic of Fannie and Freddie and McCain and Obama

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/10/us/politics/10fannie.html

    Hmmm I wonder why John McCain didn’t mention that?

  8. jezb1 Says:

    Thanks for that refresher on how a bill becomes law, Mattheson. I’d almost forgotten that since writing my previous post!

    Also, check out Gramm’s hand in getting a 262-page bill into a must-pass spending measure just before Congress’ Christmas break in December 2000. It resulted in the Commodity Futures Modernization Act that included the “Enron Loophole”, as well as legislation written with the help of financial industry lobbyists, which essentially removed newfangled financial products called swaps from any regulation. Credit default swaps are basically insurance policies that cover the losses on investments, and they have been at the heart of the subprime meltdown because they have enabled large financial institutions to turn risky loans into risky securities that could be packaged and sold to other institutions.

    In Phil Gramm’s defense, he may not have understood the impact the legislation could have in the long run. And Congress probably didn’t take the time to review and understand it before passing it with the spending measure.

  9. Ayoyosamy Says:

    “Credit default swaps are basically insurance policies that cover the losses on investments, and they have been at the heart of the subprime meltdown..”

    HOW WE GOT HERE: OBAMA AND THE SLEAZY CHICAGO CROOKS HAVE LONG BEEN IN BED WITH THE CLINTON SLIME RUNNING FANNIE MAE AND THE DEMOCRATS THEY OWN IN CONGRESS.

    AND THAT’S WHO GOT US HERE. THEY MADE THIS MESS.

    * Repeat: “Superior’s owners were to sub-prime lending, what Michael Milken was to junk bonds.” In other words, if you traced today’s sub-prime crisis back to its origins, you would come upon the role of the Pritzkers and Superior Bank of Chicago.”

    * Repeat: “Superior’s owners were to sub-prime lending, what Michael Milken was to junk bonds.”In other words, if you traced today’s sub-prime crisis back to its origins, you would come upon the role of the Pritzkers and Superior Bank of Chicago.”

    * Repeat: “Superior’s owners were to sub-prime lending, what Michael Milken was to junk bonds.”In other words, if you traced today’s sub-prime crisis back to its origins, you would come upon the role of the Pritzkers and Superior Bank of Chicago.”

  10. Ayoyosamy Says:

    “I hate baring bad news but John McCain also to money from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and also a larger amount than Barack Obama”

    A group called the Center for Responsive Politics keeps track of which politicians get Fannie and Freddie political contributions. The top three U.S. senators getting big Fannie and Freddie political bucks were Democrats and No. 2 is Sen. Barack Obama.

    Now remember, he’s only been in the Senate four years, but he still managed to grab the No. 2 spot ahead of John Kerry — decades in the Senate — and Chris Dodd, who is chairman of the Senate Banking Committee.

    Top Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
    Campaign Contributions, 1989-2008

    http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/07/top-senate-recipients-of-fanni.html

  11. Scott Thong Says:

    Posted at here, thank you peeps!

  12. jezb1 Says:

    “Superior’s owners were to sub-prime lending, what Michael Milken was to junk bonds.” In other words, if you traced today’s sub-prime crisis back to its origins, you would come upon the role of the Pritzkers and Superior Bank of Chicago.”

    It’s my understanding the first public securitization of loans containing sub-prime mortgages started in 1997 and was done by Bear Stearns.

    The predatory lending practices of Superior Bank were certainly unethical, but I don’t see how they are responsible for other banks engaging in predatory lending practices… Superior failed in 2002???

    More on credit default swaps (also referred to as credit-derivatives):

    Bond-default risk soared worldwide as the collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. sparked concern than the $62 trillion credit-derivatives market will unravel….
    Lehman, the fourth-largest securities firm until last week, has been one of the 10 largest counterparties in the market for credit-default swaps, according to a 2007 report by Fitch Ratings. The market, which is unregulated and has no central exchange where prices are disclosed, has been the fastest-growing type of so-called over-the-counter derivative, according to the Bank for International Settlements.
    “The immediate problem is the derivative default swaps market, in which a plethora of institutional accounts and dealer accounts are at risk,” Bill Gross, manager of the world’s largest bond fund at Pacific Investment Management Co. in Newport Beach, California, said in an interview with Bloomberg Radio yesterday. “It induces a tremendous amount of volatility and uncertainty.”

    Barclays Capital analysts have estimated that if a financial institution with $2 trillion in credit-default swap trades were to fail, it might trigger between $36 billion and $47 billion in losses for institutions that traded with the firm. So the Lehman fiasco–caused in part by the use of unregulated swaps–could lead to ruin elsewhere in the economy.

    Credit-derivatives and the interconnectedness of so many financial institutions is what prompted the U.S. government to lend $85 billion to AIG, for fear what their failure would cause in the U.S. and internationally.

    The U.S. government is also purchasing these same credit-derivatives in the currently estimated $700 billion bailout of Wall Street…

    It will be interesting to hear the bailout plan. I’m getting something like the government will own the securities, but will put Wall Street in charge of selling them??? Not sure yet.

    It will be interesting

  13. Same Says:

    “..but I don’t see how they are responsible for other banks engaging in predatory lending practices… Superior failed in 2002???”

    Barack Obama has slammed the banking industry for its predatory use of sub-prime mortgages, which are pushing millions of American homeowners toward foreclosure.

    But his campaign’s Finance Chair, Penny Pritzker, owned a failed Chicago thrift that helped pioneer sub-prime financial instruments and faced accusations of abuse.

    Superior Bank of Chicago went belly up in 2001 with over $1 billion in insured and uninsured deposits. This collapse came amid harsh criticism of how Superior’s owners promoted sub-prime home mortgages. As part of a settlement, the owners paid $100 million and agreed to pay another $335 million over 15 years at no interest…

    But this seven-year-old bank failure has relevance in another way today, since the chair of Superior’s board for five years was Penny Pritzker, a member of one of America’s richest families and the current Finance Chair for the presidential campaign of Barack Obama, the same candidate who has lashed out against predatory lending.

    Though Superior Bank collapsed years before the current sub-prime turmoil that is rocking the world’s financial markets – and pushing those millions of homeowners toward foreclosure – some banking experts say the Pritzkers and Superior hold a special place in the history of the sub-prime fiasco.

    “The [sub-prime] financial engineering that created the Wall Street meltdown was developed by the Pritzkers and Ernst and Young, working with Merrill Lynch to sell bonds securitized by sub-prime mortgages,” Timothy J. Anderson, a whistleblower on financial and bank fraud, told me in an interview.

    “The sub-prime mortgages,” Anderson said, “were provided to Merrill Lynch, by a nation-wide Pritzker origination system, using Superior as the cash cow, with many millions in FDIC insured deposits. Superior’s owners were to sub-prime lending, what Michael Milken was to junk bonds.”

    In other words, if you traced today’s sub-prime crisis back to its origins, you would come upon the role of the Pritzkers and Superior Bank of Chicago.

  14. jezb1 Says:

    Well, that’s some crappy stuff on Pritzker and her family’s 50% ownership of Superior Bank… but were they really the originators of this practice of predatory loans rolled up into securities and then sold off? (rhetorical question – they might be, I’m just not completely convinced they originated it; it is obvious they engaged in it!). Regardless, it’s obvious predatory lending practices were a great deal for the owner of the securities during a housing bubble and ever-growing property values, but not so great once the housing bubble burst.

    When Penny Pritzker sat on the board of Coast-to-Coast-Financial and its Superior Bank subsidiary, its Alliance Funding division engaged in subprime mortgage lending and predatory lending. The Alliance Funding division then provided a supply of subprime residential mortgages “for Superior to fund, package, and sell to parties who would complete the securitization process” (such as Bear Stearns, according to the Office of Inspector General’s Feb. 2002 report. When the recipients of the Alliance Funding/Superior Bank subprime mortgages would, predictably, be unable to meet their mortgage payments in the late 1990s and early 21st-century, Bear Stearns/EMC division would then foreclose on their mortgages, acquire their homes at little cost and (during the housing bubble) resell the houses at a big profit. But once the housing bubble burst, firms like Bear Stearns which held the “securitized” products that included the subprime mortgages that Superior Bank managers had recklessly made, apparently found that they were suddenly holding a lot of worthless paper.

  15. jezb1 Says:

    Also with the Fannie/Freddie fiasco and their accounting practices allowing them to overstate capital, and thus put them a couple billion over the minimun required by federal regulations in relation to their exposure… it’s just wrong.

    I believe in the free market, but also believe there has to be some regulations to protect against accounting manuevers and lending practices that cause these situations.

  16. Ole Geogi Says:

    I dunno whether all you guys who wrote all them responses up here read the headline but I did.

    It says: “Obama vs Palin – These Cartoons Say It All.” Look up there and see for your own selves. Why are y’all climbing into each other and calling names all over. I enjoyed looking at them cartoons, yup. Politicians? You ain’t ever gonna get the truth from them anyway.

    And I like Miss Sarah. She is an American Woman, one of us. I don’t fancy this young punk with all his foreign friends. We need an American as President for America.

  17. FloBama Says:

    I spoke to Jesse Jackson the other day and he tole me the 58th State has been added to the Union.

    Name of the State: Alobama
    Official language: Bama
    State Capital: Bama
    State Currency [the strongest in the Universe]: Bama
    State Tree, state flower, state bird, state animal: Bama
    State and World President: oBama
    Manufacturing and Chief Export: Bama
    Many others: the same LotoBama.

    I said to Jesse: “Don’t gimme all that BS Man.”

    Whereupon Jesse said to me: “No more BS Mam; the Country is a ‘changen; all the way to Washington Mam,’’ he said, ‘’in the new State we now call that AlotoBama; no more BS mam, just a lot of Bama.’’

  18. Comment on Obama vs Palin - These bCartoons/b Say It All by Ole Geogi Says:

    […] Ole Geogi wrote an interesting post today onComment on Obama vs Palin – These bCartoons/b Say It All by Ole GeogiHere’s a quick excerptIt says: “Obama vs Palin – These bCartoons/b Say It All.” Look up there and see for your own selves. Why are y’all climbing into each other and calling names all over. I enjoyed looking at them bcartoons/b, yup. Politicians? b…/b […]

  19. data Says:

    Once Buraq Obama is potus, there`ll be a new currency – the US Dinar.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: