What's next for the U.S. economy? Dow down 504 points, Lehman Bros. files for bankruptcy, McCain and Obama speak up

With the news that Lehman Brothers, a firm that survived the American Depression, has filed for the largest Chapter 11 bankruptcy in U.S. history, and Bank of American is buying Merrill Lynch, the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed below 11,000 today.

Bloggers have been talking about it since the federal bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac last week, and certainly since they turned on CNBC this morning. In her post Not So Funny Monday, Elana Centor blogs, "Working out on the elliptical today I tuned into Squawkbox on CNBC-- that would not normally be my channel of choice. But today [it is] with financial institutions Lehman Bros collapsing, Merrill Lynch swallowed and AIG. teetering."

Fausta is captivated too: In "A Vicious Cycle of Their Own Making," Fausta urges the end of "government intervention and interference," blogging that "Bailouts will only preserve the mentality that no matter how badly you screw up, there won’t be any consequences. For as long as that mentality is propped up with governmental handout after handout, no one is going to seriously demand that people are held responsible for their actions."

Now presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama have voiced their opinions, too:

John McCain on CNN: "The fundamentals of our economy are strong but these are very, very difficult, tough times." Video at link.

Barack Obama: "The most serious financial crisis since the Great Depression" of the 1930s

What do you think -- how involved should the American government be? Will you change your behavior at this point, or do you think gas prices will affect you worse? And what do you want to hear from the presidential candidates, if anything?

Comments are open!

Submitted by Lisa Stone (view blog

) on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 12:34pm

Posted In

Comments (41)

Twitter

Facebook

StumbleUpon

Comments

I'll tell you what it means for RE in NYC

That real estate crash that hit everywhere else in the US but Manhattan? It's here. Just in time for the glut of luxury condos that are coming onto the market! Good times ahead.

Suzanne Reisman, Contributing Editor - Feminism & Gender
Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants

Submitted by Suzanne Reisman on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 12:50

I hear you: California and "banana-republic
financing"

...made national news today. I woke up to the announcement that the legislature broke its deadlock, but may earn a Gubernator-ial veto. From SFGate.com:

"The budget, already a record-breaking 78 days late, would close a gap of about $17 billion for the fiscal year that began July 1 without imposing new taxes. It does, however, require taxpayers to make earlier payments to the state government..."

I didn't vote for Schwarzenegger, but I do like the way he's demanding budget reform. I'm so tired of the partisan politics that detract from real policy-making -- and I'm convinced that's what the governor's trying to do. My favorite proof? That Treasurer Bill Lockyer (a former state senator and Democrat) can agree this closely on the budget. From the same article:

"Schwarzenegger wasn't the only state official to criticize the plan. Treasurer Bill Lockyer, a Democrat, said at a finance conference in San Francisco this morning that the budget was absurd, irresponsible and "gives gimmicks a bad name."

"It's banana republic financing," Lockyer said. The spending plan relies on "phony money and phony estimates," he said."

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette

BlogHer is non-partisan but our bloggers aren't! Follow our coverage of Politics & News.

Submitted by Lisa Stone on Tue, 09/16/2008 - 11:21

Once again the Corporate

Once again the Corporate Welfare Deadbeats are going to come to Washington...or Warshington as John McCain calls it, hat in hand looking for more bailouts. I know that so far the government hasn't jumped in with Lehman Bros, but give it time.

Somehow, some way, once again we're going to have to pay for the corporate greed that's allowed to run amok when the governement, as many a Republican likes to say, unshackles big business so that they can let their profits trickle down to the rest of us.

What a joke!

Megan Smith
BlogHer Contributing Editor, TV/YouTube
Megan's Minute: Quirky Commentary Around The Clock

Submitted by Megan Smith on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 13:08

Corporate Welfare

Republicans have a huge problem giving what they call "hand-outs" to citizens of this country who are poor, hungry, unemployed, disabled, homeless, etc. In those cases "welfare" is a dirty word. But, bailing-out CEO's and multi-million dollar corporations, with the tax dollars of hard working Americans, that type of welfare is acceptable. I just don't get it?

It's a sad, sad day for 95% of this country. Who is going to bail them out? Shame on anyone against helping out the most needy of our citizens, but o.k. with bailing-out the multi-millionaires.

Contributing Editor Catherine Morgan
at Catherine-Morgan.com, The Political Voices of Women, Care2 Election<

Submitted by Catherine Morgan on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 13:41

Cascade Effect Is Real

Not bailing out some of these corporations would be much, much worse for your average person due to the way the markets have been set up to work. The real issues have to do with Reagan's repealing all of the rules and protections that FDR had put in place. People keep voting for the two parties and that kow-tow to big business and they are surprised?

I remember saying that the 1920s were repeating in the 1990s - but every one said that the old rules don't apply. Well, actually, the old rules of behavior applied but the laws that had protected the idiots from themselves had been repealed to serve unending greed at the top.

Everyon seems to forget these lessons - including the governments who have invested heavily in these markets. This has put many people who were never before at risk at risk if these funds fail. Privatization is always bad in government. ALWAYS!

MLO / Melissa

Submitted by MLOKnitting on Tue, 09/16/2008 - 13:54

Who is part of the problem?

Barack Obama (D-Fannie Mae)

Submitted by BackyardConservative on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 14:50

Let me get this straight.

Just to be clear. You believe people should hold Barack Obama partially responsible for this calamity in some way because Fannie Mae donated money to his campaign (~$106,000, chump change amount considering how much money ordinary citizens have donated to his campaign). You also think Obama should answer for someone formerly associated with his campaign who got a questionable loan through Countrywide and do penance because he used to work for a law firm that had Rezko as a client and also used to be the neighbor of Rezko, who also donated money to Obama's senate campaign that Obama later donated to charity when he learned more about Rezko's background.

Using your implied logic, I suppose we could say that home owners who had their loans guaranteed through Fannie Mae are part of the problem even though they had nothing to do with the regulations that failed to work, or that if my neighbor turns out to be dishonest and I bought a lot from him once then I am dishonest by association, or if a lady received money from a benefactor that later went into bankruptcy that the lady is somehow to be blamed, in part, for her benefactor's failure to manage money properly. Is that what you're saying?

It seems like a long stretch of implied guilt by thin association with a heavy dose of dirty innuendo to me. Karl Rove would probably say that you didn't cross the line, however, as much as a McCain ad.

I believe voters should be much more concerned about John McCain's admission that he knows little about economics and yet is running for the presidency while we're in the midst of the worst economic crisis in decades. Voters should be alarmed that for a while McCain's crutch boy and economic adviser was Phil Gramm, the man who resigned from his McCain slot after calling America a nation of whiners regarding the economy, the same faltering economy he helped create.

Maybe we should take a look at why McCain thought Phil should be trusted with our economic future since Gramm has a far bigger connection to the banking industry than any of the people you try to smear over Obama. Gramm, while chairing the Senate banking committee, actually pushed through legislation that contributed to the mortgage meltdown, legislation that bank lobbyists helped to write.

So, the real good old boy network, the one that runs with McCain/Bush economic policies folded in their wallets, is what we should scrutinize here, not flimsy connections to developers and dismissed folks who got mortgage loans through means unrelated to Obama.

McCain isn't just part of the problem, he and his cronies are the problem.

Nordette is a Contributing Editor with BlogHer.com whose personal blog is hosted on another site at this link.

Submitted by Nordette on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 16:14

How is that denial working

How is that denial working for you, Anne? :)

John McCain’s connections to the two mortgage companies are more numerous [than Obama's]. His campaign manager, Rick Davis, headed the Homeownership Alliance, an advocacy group for the two lenders. His close adviser, Charlie Black, is a long-time lobbyist whose firm represented Freddie Mac.

Two of McCain’s bundlers, supporters who help raise large amounts of money for the campaign, have ties to Fannie Mae. Robert H. Holt is a lobbyist for the firm, and Wayne Berman is managing director of Ogilvy Government Relations, which also represents the company.

A third McCain bundler, Geffrey T. Boisi, is a director of Freddie Mac.

At least 20 McCain fundraisers have lobbied on behalf of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, netting at least $12.3 million in fees over the past nine years.

Submitted by miteegirl on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 16:29

Ah yes. So McCain has

Ah yes. So McCain has received more from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac than Obama has. (And both contribute to EVERYONE running for office quite heavily.)

McCain

$169,000 directly and Freddie Mac's board member Geoffrey T. Boisi and Fannie Mae lobbyist Richard F. Hohlthave raised between$100,000-250,000 for McCain.

Obama

$122,850 directly and Jim Johnson (former CEO of Fannie Mae) was involved in Obama campaign for 7 whole days on the VP selection committee before stepping down.

Source

Anne. As someone whose "family has a tradition of journalism", you should know better than to present only half of a story from a questionable source. Because what you are doing isn't journalism. It's more like rumor-mongering and gossiping.

Submitted by miteegirl on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 17:15

Still planning to ride it out

I won't get into political issues here, but as far as finances go, I am still planning to ride it out and not pull out of the stock market. Hopefully I'm not making a huge mistake.

---

I blog at MomGrind

I manage my kids' activities at UpToUs

Submitted by Vered on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 15:13

Vered, my small purse and study of
macroeconomics says yes

Diversification, diversification, diversification, even if I have to cut each red cent into thirds. I agree -- not pulling out what little I have, but am going to think hard if/when I can about real estate and $$$$aving. I never do enough of the latter.

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette

BlogHer is non-partisan but our bloggers aren't! Follow our coverage of Politics & News.

Submitted by Lisa Stone on Tue, 09/16/2008 - 11:23

We're rearranging our

We're rearranging our finances right now to see if we can afford to buy stock right now.

Yes, buy.

There are some incredible deals to be had at this moment.

We are already pretty diversified. Even though the last few days have been pretty shocking, most of our stocks across four retirement portfolios are still up since we bought in. The wildest ride is for our Emerging Markets stocks and the stocks tied to the S&P500. But even the S&P 500 stocks aren't as bad as they were in '03. One of our short term investment stocks is still going gangbusters, even in this down market, and was up today.

Our trick to holding the panic at bay is to do what Lisa is recommending. Diversify. I've been rebalancing my portfolio every few years, and I was socking money away in my 401k since I was 23. But I won't rebalance until the market pulls out of this nosedive. We buy low and sell high, even though my nerves often needle me during the low points.

If you are much closer to retirement than we are, that will require different tactics entirely.

Submitted by miteegirl on Tue, 09/16/2008 - 13:13

Barack Obama is business as usual, nothing
new, never challenged

the corrupt machine in Chicago. He became part of it. Never challenged corruption in Washington.

Unlike John McCain.

Submitted by BackyardConservative on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 16:23

Yes McCain has really punished lobbyists by
giving them all jobs

Well, not all of them. The rest are contributing wildly to his campaign in record numbers.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/09/mccain.lobbying/

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4210251

Mom-101

Submitted by Mom101 on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 17:24

How do you know? Have you

How do you know? Have you met the man? Do you live in Chicago? Have you worked on any of his campaigns, or those opposing him? WHERE'S THE BEEF? Because I have done all of those things, and I see NO indication that you are right. And I'm a registered Republican.

Submitted by CRosberg on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 18:06

Wilmette

Anne Leary lives in Wilmette, Illinois, a northern suburb of Chicago which is 89.7% white, 8% Asian and only 0.56% black. The median income for a Wilmette family is $123,000.

There is no poverty in Wilmette, no diversity. It is a rather pretty, well-tended, well off little town. My father-in-law was born there and has family there.

It in no way resembles Chicago.

Anne is a self-described homemaker.

I cannot find any reference to Anne having met or worked with Obama, nor having lived in Chicago. As far as I can see, Anne did not live in Obama's district while he was an Illinois Senator. However, Obama is one of the Senators from the State of Illinois and Ms. Leary does live in our state.

Submitted by miteegirl on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 18:54

Phil Gramm

Honestly, I have a hard time trusting a guy (John McCain) whose top economic advisor was Phil Gramm. While in the Senate, Gramm was directly involved in creating legislation that made credit derivatives like credit default swaps possible. These are the types of vehicles that allowed banks get rid of the risk of underwriting loans. Basically, mortgage lenders could make the loans, package them in securities and enjoy the commissions without the risk. Hence, the reason that mortgage lenders were gung-ho about approving anyone and everyone. They didn't have to deal with the risk. The investment banks that bought these securities took on the risk. McCain gets his economic advice from a guy that thought these types of policies were good ideas.

Anyway, like Vered, I'm keeping my stocks in. Most of my holdings (in my retirement account mainly) are fundamentally sound and should recover when the bear market ends. And it should end well before I need my retirement accounts in 30 years.

This Time, It's Personal

Yielding Wealth

Submitted by MMarquit on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 18:06

We are all linked

The people on the bottom, in the middle and on the top are all linked. Having had the corporate world held up to me in my non-profit world as somehow being wiser, I've always felt deeply that there was a lot of lies, cover-ups, and fast money being made with no long-term view or safe-guards.

In addition to the importance of safe-guards, we have to have a return to ethics in both the corporate and non-profit sector. If the deepest mission of a corporation is to make money and the folks that are supposed to be watching out for us, i.e., the government, aren't doing their jobs - then you will continue to have the dismantling of institutions.

I recommend reading the Money issue of Lapham's Quarterly. Money only has value if people agree it does. In and of itself it is worth nothing. It is only a conduit.

I'm 'bout to be like my grandmother and keep the very few $ I have left in a safe deposit box and in various hidden places.

Let me return to where I began - we are all linked in the economy and in the world together and while I have never been any where near rich, it bothers me when rich people screw it up for the rest of us. It bothers me that I don't feel secure. I am hoping I am resilient enough to survive this economy.

blog.candelariasilva.com

Good and plenty!

Submitted by Candelaria Silva on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 18:20

Financial Collapse

The policies which led to this failure were architected under the Clinton administration--much as I, a fervent Clinton supporter, hate to admit it. A lot of people benefitted from the loose financial policies which opened up the mortgage market---and which are at the root of this failure (risky mortages, hedge funds, etc.). And not just Main Street either--a lot of politicians on both side of the aisle closed their eyes, put out their hands and received those risky mortgages.

The bottom line is, it won't be helpful to play politics with this situation. It goes beyond political ideology.

Jane Becker

http://thedamedomain.blogspot.com

Submitted by Jane Becker on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 18:52

And the quote of the day goes to...

Jane Becker!

"The bottom line is, it won't be helpful to play politics with this situation. It goes beyond political ideology."

Spill Jane - what're you reading and what do you recommend?

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette

BlogHer is non-partisan but our bloggers aren't! Follow our coverage of Politics & News.

Submitted by Lisa Stone on Tue, 09/16/2008 - 11:27

The Empty House On The Corner

It has a federal notice on each window. It states that its is now federal property and the former occupants have been evicted. No curtains, nothing but bits of the former tenants property. I'm guessing it was a Freddie or Fannie Mae property.

It was just a simple house but it was a family's home. There will be more like it. The property values in the area will drop. People are being uprooted. Not everyone has a place to go, so there will be an increase in the homeless population.

A couple thousand people lost their jobs and careers today. Someone's retirement income has just tanked. How do I know if the money I've worked for isn't going to be swallowed up by a bank that crashes and burns? Yes, FDIC will kick in but for how long can it do that? How many more financial institutions are going down?

F*ck the politics and posturing. No one, not conservative, libertarian or liberal will go unaffected. Either we allow the market to correct itself via the free market system and we all suffer or we have governmental intervention and we all suffer.

If anyone has a better option I'd love to hear it. You can't blame a political candidate, Obama or McCain, for systemic corporate greed and malfeasance. Nor should those responsible get golden parachutes financed by the U.S.

Gena - Out On The Stoop

Submitted by Gena Haskett on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 19:15

Well-said!

blog.candelariasilva.com

Good and plenty!

Submitted by Candelaria Silva on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 19:29

Wow

For someone who posts anonymously miteegirl how nice to go for the personal attacks.

I do not view the NY Times as a trustworthy source. Here's mine. It is nonpartisan. The people who fund it, if anything lean to the left.

Capital Eye

END HIDING BLOG HEADER -->

Update: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Invest in Lawmakers

Published by Lindsay Renick Mayer on September 11, 2008 11:26 AM

| Permalink
| Comments (7)

When the federal government announced two months ago that it would prop up mortgage buyers Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, CRP looked at
how much money members of Congress had collected since 1989 from the
companies. On Sunday the government completely took over the two
government-sponsored enterprises, and we've returned to our data to
bring you the updates, this time providing a list of all 354 lawmakers
who have gotten money from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
(in July we posted the top 25). These totals are based on data released
electronically from the FEC on Sept. 2 and include contributions to
lawmakers' leadership PACs and candidate committees from the
floundering companies' PACs and employees. Current members of Congress
have received a total of $4.8 million from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,
with Democrats collecting 57 percent of that. This week we also wrote
about how much money lawmakers had invested of their own money in the companies last year--a total of up to $1.7 million.

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

Name
Office
State
Party
Grand Total
Total from
PACs
Total from
Individuals

Dodd, Christopher J
S
CT
D
$165,400
$48,500
$116,900

Obama, Barack
S
IL
D
$126,349
$6,000
$120,349

Kerry, John
S
MA
D
$111,000
$2,000
$109,000

Bennett, Robert F
S
UT
R
$107,999
$71,499
$36,500

Bachus, Spencer
H
AL
R
$103,300
$70,500
$32,800

Blunt, Roy
H
MO
R
$96,950
$78,500
$18,450

Kanjorski, Paul E
H
PA
D
$96,000
$57,500
$38,500

Bond, Christopher S 'Kit'
S
MO
R
$95,400
$64,000
$31,400

Shelby, Richard C
S
AL
R
$80,000
$23,000
$57,000

Reed, Jack
S
RI
D
$78,250
$43,500
$34,750

Reid, Harry
S
NV
D
$77,000
$60,500
$16,500

Clinton, Hillary
S
NY
D
$76,050
$8,000
$68,050

Davis, Tom
H
VA
R
$75,499
$13,999
$61,500

Boehner, John
H
OH
R
$67,750
$60,500
$7,250

Conrad, Kent
S
ND
D
$64,491
$22,000
$42,491

Reynolds, Tom
H
NY
R
$62,200
$53,000
$9,200

Johnson, Tim
S
SD
D
$61,000
$20,000
$41,000

Pelosi, Nancy
H
CA
D
$56,250
$47,000
$9,250

Carper, Tom
S
DE
D
$55,889
$31,350
$24,539

Hoyer, Steny H
H
MD
D
$55,500
$51,500
$4,000

Pryce, Deborah
H
OH
R
$55,500
$45,000
$10,500

Emanuel, Rahm
H
IL
D
$51,750
$16,000
$35,750

Isakson, Johnny
S
GA
R
$49,200
$35,500
$13,700

Cantor, Eric
H
VA
R
$48,500
$46,500
$2,000

Crapo, Mike
S
ID
R
$47,250
$40,500
$6,750

Frank, Barney
H
MA
D
$42,350
$30,500
$11,850

Bean, Melissa
H
IL
D
$41,249
$34,999
$6,250

Bayh, Evan
S
IN
D
$41,100
$16,500
$24,600

McConnell, Mitch
S
KY
R
$41,000
$40,000
$1,000

Maloney, Carolyn B
H
NY
D
$39,750
$16,500
$23,250

Dorgan, Byron L
S
ND
D
$38,750
$30,500
$8,250

Miller, Gary
H
CA
R
$38,000
$31,500
$6,500

Rangel, Charles B
H
NY
D
$38,000
$14,750
$23,250

Tiberi, Patrick J
H
OH
R
$35,700
$32,600
$3,100

Bunning, Jim
S
KY
R
$33,802
$29,650
$4,152

Stabenow, Debbie
S
MI
D
$33,450
$32,000
$1,450

Chambliss, Saxby
S
GA
R
$33,250
$22,500
$10,750

Menendez, Robert
S
NJ
D
$31,250
$30,500
$750

Enzi, Mike
S
WY
R
$31,000
$27,500
$3,500

Van Hollen, Chris
H
MD
D
$30,700
$11,000
$19,700

Landrieu, Mary L
S
LA
D
$30,600
$20,000
$10,600

Murray, Patty
S
WA
D
$30,000
$23,000
$7,000

Clyburn, James E
H
SC
D
$29,750
$26,000
$3,750

Crowley, Joseph
H
NY
D
$29,700
$25,500
$4,200

Sessions, Pete
H
TX
R
$29,472
$24,000
$5,472

McCrery, Jim
H
LA
R
$29,000
$26,000
$3,000

Hooley, Darlene
H
OR
D
$28,750
$19,500
$9,250

Royce, Ed
H
CA
R
$28,600
$4,000
$24,600

Renzi, Rick
H
AZ
R
$28,250
$28,000
$250

Lieberman, Joe
S
CT
I
$28,250
$11,500
$16,750

Baucus, Max
S
MT
D
$27,500
$21,000
$6,500

Moore, Dennis
H
KS
D
$26,550
$25,500
$1,050

Coleman, Norm
S
MN
R
$24,690
$12,000
$12,690

Matheson, Jim
H
UT
D
$24,500
$24,000
$500

Schumer, Charles E
S
NY
D
$24,250
$1,500
$22,750

Durbin, Dick
S
IL
D
$23,750
$14,000
$9,750

Rogers, Mike
H
MI
R
$22,750
$21,000
$1,750

Lynch, Stephen F
H
MA
D
$22,500
$13,500
$9,000

Rockefeller, Jay
S
WV
D
$22,250
$5,000
$17,250

Smith, Gordon H
S
OR
R
$22,000
$20,000
$2,000

Mikulski, Barbara A
S
MD
D
$21,750
$16,500
$5,250

McCain, John
S
AZ
R
$21,550
$0
$21,550

Submitted by BackyardConservative on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 20:25

So What You Really Saying Is That Congress is
on the Take

and that we no longer have a representative government. That big business and political PACs have total control over the policies and legislation of this country.

Therefore, there is no point in choosing any candidate for president because Congress will only listen to those entities that fill their political and personal purses.

Hmmm. Based on the activities of lobbyist Jack Abramoff, sneaky political PACs and Republican members of Congress yes, you have a point. And no, I didn't forget that Democrats pioneered the process of pay for vote/consideration.

It start with ethics. It continues with good business and not putting your firm in jeopardy with practices that ultimately could destroy it. In government it starts with true leadership and having a structure that prevents voter influence by outside entities. After the first six years in congress how was the Republican leadership in these matters?

Yes, McCain and Obama took money from Fannie and Freddie Mae. Keep looking both may have received money from questionable sources or special interest that you don't like.

However, it was a series of bad business and un-ethical decisions that cause this financial meltdown. People making bad or informed decisions caused this meltdown. Selling inflated loan with little or no collateral caused this meltdown.

Congress was a factor but they didn't start this fire.

Gena - Out On The Stoop

Submitted by Gena Haskett on Tue, 09/16/2008 - 03:46

How did I attack you? I

How did I attack you? I said you live in a very nice, very white town.

That you didn't live in Chicago.

And linked to where you listed your occupation as homemaker.

That is considered a personal attack....how?

Submitted by miteegirl on Tue, 09/16/2008 - 05:30

Please don't copy and paste

Please don't copy and paste pages of text into comments. A link to the source is all that's necessary, and we're not having to scroll endlessly through text that you didn't originate.

Yes, both Republicans and Democrats benefited from Fannie/Freddie contributions. Including both Obama and McCain. Now, what was the point you're trying to make? That we shouldn't vote for either? That our Congress is the best money can buy?

Submitted by shelleyp on Tue, 09/16/2008 - 13:01

Obama rakes it in. Obama let

Obama rakes it in.

Obama let down the people of Illinois. Absent on Ethics. Backed corrupt nepotism. Totally mismanages an opportunity for Chicago School Reform.Supported Sex Ed for kindergartners.

Submitted by BackyardConservative on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 20:38

I am a person in Illinois.

I am a person in Illinois. All of my friends and neighbors are people in Illinois. We don't feel that Obama has let us down. We are quite proud of Obama.

The ethics bill is being hashed out by the Illinois Senate. Obama is serving in the United States Senate. Although proud of our state, we do not operate under the illusion that Illinois IS the United States.

I am not finding any reference to corrupt nepotism in the article that you cut and pasted into your blog. Be careful that no one accuses you of "phoning it in" as a blogger, A.L.

I can't even comment about your blog entry regarding the Annenberg Challenge, it is too difficult to decipher through all of the !!! and font changes and formatting changes. But the activity of the Annenberg Challenge, to support reform through local school councils, was a very good idea from our viewpoint. You know, the actual people who live in Chicago, send our children to CPS schools, and who work with CPS? There were a lot of opponents to school reform at that level, including Mayor Daley (a fellow Democrat!). But the attempts to get more power into the hands of local school councils was, and continues to be, important.

Yes, Obama supported age and developmentally appropriate sex ed for kindergarteners. (The legislation is pretty clear on the age and developmentally appropriate standard.) Which at that age addresses issues of "inappropriate touch" and avoiding sexual predators and the accurate names for body parts as well as respect for others.

I believe that I went through something similar in kindergarden and first grade (in rural Ohio!) with "Patch the Pony" where we watched filmstrips about stranger danger, etc. I can find NO reliable source linking SIECUS to this legislation by way of Obama. But I'm open to seeing any evidence of his proposal to use SIECUS. And, as I am reviewing the SIECUS lesson plans (which gives more specific ages for topics taught), I am not seeing anything wrong with what is suggested for Age 5. In fact, I think this is a very responsibly and respectfully created curriculum.

Submitted by miteegirl on Tue, 09/16/2008 - 06:31

Please don't repeat

Please don't repeat assertions that have been proven to be false. In addition, instead of repeating sentences of others, I'd like to hear some original content from you.

Lastly, what do your links have to do with the topic of this post?

Submitted by shelleyp on Tue, 09/16/2008 - 07:20

I have to agree

I have to agree -- Anne/Backyard Conservative, can you connect your links to the conversation I began yesterday? I don't see how bomb-throwing at a candidate with which you disagree addresses the issues here.

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette

BlogHer is non-partisan but our bloggers aren't! Follow our coverage of Politics & News.

Submitted by Lisa Stone on Tue, 09/16/2008 - 10:33