Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Head of Obama's VP vetting team resigns

STEVE HOLLAND

Reuters

Latest comment posted at 4:25 PM EST 11/06/08

Jim Johnson, former chairman of mortgage lender Fannie Mae, quits amid criticism over his personal loan deals ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Ryan Hickman from Canada writes: In other words 'Johnson, you're outta here! I don't want you within a million miles of me!'
  2. Thomas D'Arcy McGee from Canada writes:
    Last night on MSNBC, one of their Republican commentators, maybe it was Pat Buchanan, was vouching for Johnson, saying it would be ridiculous if he was criticized in this appointment because he was completely above board and there was no way he had done anything wrong in this loan deal.

    I guess Obama feels he can take no chances after the way the Republican TV Network (Fox News) ragged on the Jeremiah Wright tape three times an hour for six weeks and the conservative talk radio smear machine dined out on it.
  3. Rain Couver from Canada writes: Yet another questionable character on the Obama team. How many does that make now?

    Too bad there is no candidate that shows real leadership.
  4. Robin M from Canada writes: The Republicans are going to find that Obama, and the surrogates in his campaign are unlike other Dem candidates in the past. His reaction to slams by McCains team never go unanswered and quickly too. That is what happens when you have a brilliant mind running for President with his opponent having to rely on teleprompters...

    http://thepage.time.com/2008/06/11/killer-instinct/
  5. Charles Martel from The Outer Reaches, Canada writes: Robin M from Canada writes: The Republicans are going to find that Obama, and the surrogates in his campaign are unlike other Dem candidates in the past. His reaction to slams by McCains team never go unanswered and quickly too. That is what happens when you have a brilliant mind running for President with his opponent having to rely on teleprompters... --------------------- This brilliant mind that saw no reason to vet the vetters: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_WY29woBxg LOL. Or the brilliant mind that has already thrown a dozen men and women under the bus? Or the brilliant mind whose website got owned? Or that brilliant mind that has already changed policies on Jerusalem and Iran? Oh, that brilliant mind. Worry not though. You, and his fan club, think he is a 'lightworker' too: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2008/06/06/notes060608.DTL 'Many spiritually advanced people I know (not coweringly religious, mind you, but deeply spiritual) identify Obama as a Lightworker, that rare kind of attuned being who has the ability to lead us not merely to new foreign policies or health care plans or whatnot, but who can actually help usher in a new way of being on the planet, of relating and connecting and engaging with this bizarre earthly experiment. These kinds of people actually help us evolve. They are philosophers and peacemakers of a very high order, and they speak not just to reason or emotion, but to the soul.
  6. only mikey from Canada writes: Give it time Obama's crew will have soom surprises in the future--keep watching!
  7. Charles Martel from The Outer Reaches, Canada writes: Thomas D'Arcy McGee from Canada writes: Last night on MSNBC, one of their Republican commentators, maybe it was Pat Buchanan, was vouching for Johnson, saying it would be ridiculous if he was criticized in this appointment because he was completely above board and there was no way he had done anything wrong in this loan deal. I guess Obama feels he can take no chances after the way the Republican TV Network (Fox News) ragged on the Jeremiah Wright tape three times an hour for six weeks and the conservative talk radio smear machine dined out on it. ---------------------- MSNBC should be ashamed to have that man on television. His very own magazine claims the Jews orchestrated 911; Buchanan is a reprehensible person. And he does not represent mainstream conservative America any more than troofers represent mainstream left America. Even Obama's website is now cleaning out the anti-Semitic filth on it. http://www.amconmag.com/2008/2008_06_02/cover.html As far as Fox being the Republican news outlet, you should note that many Hillary supporters are now watching Fox because of the balanced coverage. Maybe you should note that ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN are all Democrat (anti-Republican) channels. I too cringe though at the very concept of freedom of or diversity of thought.
  8. Hans Ulster from From the Canadian Oilsands, Canada writes: This story has been developing for days now, and anybody who seriously follows the election/campaign new this was coming.

    theglobeandmail.com
  9. Hans Ulster from From the Canadian Oilsands, Canada writes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_WY29woBxg

    I loved Obama's answer about no need to vet the vetters. Experience! Change! Hope! LOL. I look forward to the town hall meetings, provided Obama accepts the invitation.
  10. Hans Ulster from From the Canadian Oilsands, Canada writes: Ryan Hickman from Canada writes: In other words 'Johnson, you're outta here! I don't want you within a million miles of me!

    -----------------------

    I guess he is under the bus with Wright, Ayers, Pfleger, Samantha Power, the bloggers on his website, Rezko, his radical church, Malley, Khalidi and others.

    Under the bus is getting crowded! This guy is showing some real management potential and a keen sense of who to align himself with.
  11. Charles Martel from The Outer Reaches, Canada writes: This is the last chance Soros-backed Democrats have to get a socialist into power. I believe the next census will be in 2010, two years before the 2012 elections. Why is that important......well, red states are going to win big because of population booms; blue states are shrinking and will lose representation. The Democrats will permanently lose the House of Representatives after 2012. Seems as if all those Christians and whatnot have been having more kids than their secular counter-parts in the blue states.
  12. Charles Martel from The Outer Reaches, Canada writes: Thomas D'Arcy McGee from Canada writes: Last night on MSNBC, one of their Republican commentators, maybe it was Pat Buchanan, was vouching for Johnson, saying it would be ridiculous if he was criticized in this appointment because he was completely above board and there was no way he had done anything wrong in this loan deal. I guess Obama feels he can take no chances after the way the Republican TV Network (Fox News) ragged on the Jeremiah Wright tape three times an hour for six weeks and the conservative talk radio smear machine dined out on it. ---------- Yeah, we wouldn't want a journalist to question why a presidential candidate listened to a raving lunatic for 20 years. Nor would we want to know that Obama signed Bush's Energy Bill, nor would we want to know about Obama's actual voting record, nor would we want to know about Ayers, golly. Why would we even need journalists, if they keep on bringing up uncomfortable stuff. After all, the role of the media is not to critically analyze. No wonder lefties like socialism and communism - no need to worry about a pesky media. Lambaste Fox away! And why hasn't Obama released his birth certificate yet like McCain with his medical records, as asked? Oh, yeah, Obama is ABOVE scrutiny.
  13. R. M. from Regina, Canada writes: Bad start...sign of more to come actually....I think Obama will continue to stumble.
  14. Charles Martel from The Outer Reaches, Canada writes: Obama now says no troop withdrawal until certain conditions are met and no timetable. Change!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kFrFIFizkU

    FLIP-FLOPPER. He now endorses the Bush and McCain strategies. LOL.
  15. Charles Martel from The Outer Reaches, Canada writes: Sorry, that was his position in 2004.
  16. Patrick King from Canada writes: Obama still hasn't explained why Caroline Kennedy is one of the three people on his Veep vetting team. If it's because she is a former first daughter, why isn't Chelsea Clinton on the team?
  17. Prairie Boy from Canada writes: The Obama campaign is also looking for a web security guy because to be honest he is learning about hate messages from his supporters about some of his positions. I guess being fresh and new also means being unaware of reality. I read his campaign staff was going to be 700. Good times are just starting.
  18. 20 20 from Canada writes: You'd think this was an American website given the intense Swiftboat action here.

    Appointing Jim Johnson in the first place was a mistake, so this resignation now could be a positive thing. It doesn't exactly make his message of change credible when he appoints someone that is the epitome of corporate-political elite: corporate executive, private banking firm, multiple board member, Goldman Sachs, UnitedHealth Group, Trilateral Commission, Council of Foreign Relations, Bilderberg, etc.
  19. Oswaldo I from Canada writes: 'We're going to go through a process in the vice-presidential search where I look at a whole range of options. This is one of the most important decisions I can make, and I think I'll signal how I want to operate my presidency.' Barack Obama June 4, 2008.
  20. Patrick King from Canada writes: This is only the beginning of troubles for Obama. I suddenly have a feeling that Caroline Kennedy is on his Veep vetting team because Obama is going to choose her as his running mate. In 2000, Dick Cheney led Bush's Veep vetting team, and got the job himself. The Kennedys will never stop clinging to the throne, and they care only about themselves. Ted Kennedy is plotting to have Caroline Kennedy as Obama's VP, and then to become the first woman President. The latest CNN poll of polls shows Obama is leading McCain by 5%, ie. 48% to 43%. Even with no margin of error, which is unlikely, Obama's lead is only a low single-digit. When you take into consideration Bush's low ratings, McCain is actually doing very well. I'm sure Obama is counting on Hillary Clinton's supporters to move to his side automatically, over time. My view is, it is not necessarily so. For postmenopausal women, for example, whether McCain is pro-life or pro-choice is a non-issue. Assume Obama will successfully attract the majority of the 18 million Hillary supporters to his side, but if only a meagre 2.5% of them vote for McCain and 5% stay home or vote for Nader, McCain will receive an extra 450,000 votes, and Obama will lose 1.35 million votes. That's all it takes for McCain to win.
  21. Mr. Justice from Canada writes: Meanwhile, Ol' John McCain shows what he thinks about 'traditional family values':

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1024927/The-wife-John-McCain-callously-left-behind.html
  22. Zippity DooDah from Canada writes: This Couillard Affair is getting way out of hand, first Bernier, then the aid, now this.... who's next?
  23. Mr. Justice from Canada writes: Zippity: . . . Maybe the pressures of the campaign in the US will make John McCain dump Wife No. 2 and jump to Wife No. 3 . . . Ms. Couillard ?

    . . . just sayin' . . . .
  24. Charles Martel from The Outer Reaches, Canada writes: Patrick King from Canada writes: Assume Obama will successfully attract the majority of the 18 million Hillary supporters to his side, but if only a meagre 2.5% of them vote for McCain and 5% stay home or vote for Nader, McCain will receive an extra 450,000 votes, and Obama will lose 1.35 million votes. That's all it takes for McCain to win.

    -------------

    A recent CNN poll showed that up to 40% of Hillary supporters will not vote for Obama.
  25. Charles Martel from The Outer Reaches, Canada writes: 20 20 from Canada writes: You'd think this was an American website given the intense Swiftboat action here. Appointing Jim Johnson in the first place was a mistake, so this resignation now could be a positive thing. It doesn't exactly make his message of change credible when he appoints someone that is the epitome of corporate-political elite: corporate executive, private banking firm, multiple board member, Goldman Sachs, UnitedHealth Group, Trilateral Commission, Council of Foreign Relations, Bilderberg, etc. ------------------ Uh, that is not why he stepped down. Fannie Mae played a huge role in the sub-prime mortgage mess, and johnson got preferential loans from a friend in the mortgate business that were below market rate. Further, there are troubling connections between Johnson and Soros, the man who is the money behind Obama. In fact, they all met up at Perseus, who actually runs the book publishing arm of his empire.....and who financed McLelland's latest "expose". Of course, there are many other connections that are quite troubling. Johnson had to scurry within 24 hours of the news hitting the blogosphere and less than a day after obama's "i don't vet my vetters" incomprehensible speech. But I guess if he really wanted change, he could have chosen an unemployed socialist.
  26. Hans Ulster from From the Canadian Oilsands, Canada writes: I liked how Obama referred to his advisor as "tangential".

    Cripes, he is one of the people vetting your vice president, and you call him tangential!? Wow.
  27. Mr. Justice from Canada writes: Hans: . . . Yeah, Hans; that's a really BIG ISSUE.
  28. Mr. Justice from Canada writes: Meanwhile, in the US, conservative Republican Presiding Judge of the United States Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, Alex Kozinski (appointed by Ronald Reagan) puts porno on his website; ahhhhhhhhhhh . . . gotta love it:

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article/article?f=/n/a/2008/06/10/national/a154507D62.DTL

    Will McCain appoint him to the US Supreme Court ? Chuckles Martel: What do YOU think ?
  29. No Name from Centre of the Universe, Canada writes: Nothing but a buncha mewling babes can make a meal out of this insignificant political morsel. Ain't no thing but a chicken wing now!

    If anything, Obama's proving that he's got some saavy political chops here and that the Republicans are going to do nothing but continue to go hungry and stink themselves up in the process of dumpster diving behind Chez Barack's. Lean times for McCain's late-arriving hobo-army -- Hillary has already licked that bin clean!

    Gobama.
  30. Chuck the Canuk from the east, Canada writes: hahahahaha. did i not tell you that this guy obama was bad news??????? damn the americans are stupid when it comes to their politics. they elect bush 2 times and let him start an illegal war that has bankrupted the USA and caused a recession. they will probably vote for the darth vader mccain this november. because obama is gonna self destruct. first his anti america church thing, now this sleazy backroom money thing of one of his chief advisors. dummies. i hope hillary stays in the picture somewhere, because once obama implodes, she will be the only thing standing between mccain and another 4 years of bush like policies and war. because mccain is way worse than bush, but not worse than cheney, who is the devil i think. lol. we can only hope his ticker gives out soon.
  31. Scenic Sask! from Canada writes: Keep on looking! Leave no stone unturned, you'll find a VP! He/she's under one of them!
  32. Duncan Morris from Salmon Arm, Canada writes: Not much more meat on this than the lappel pin but it sure lets the dogs out! Balanced news from Fox lol. You guys and gals are still sore about HillBilly. Get over it and move on. Even she has. This is a none issue.
  33. Michael Sharp from Victoria, Canada writes:

    Will you look at the ears on that puppy!

    Obama can give Prince Charles a run for his money.

    One thing you'll never see.

    Obama and Chuck, sailing.
  34. Duncan Morris from Salmon Arm, Canada writes: He is said to be a good communicator. Listening is a big part of that process. Ears aside he will probably be the fitest president in history. I'll take ears over tummy anyday.
  35. Michael Sharp from Victoria, Canada writes:

    Obama had a dream.

    Then he woke up.

    He still had big ears.

    But he was free.
  36. Jo Ingblat from Canada writes: MJ, ease up! Why are you resorting to posting under two names? You really should relax a bit--there aren't that many Globe readers who can vote.
  37. A J from Canada writes: From time to time, I've seen comments referencing polls that show that McCain will pick up substantial numbers of Clinton supporters, thus causing Obama to lose. I don't recall ever seeing a link to such polls, however, are we provided with info about when the poll was done.

    The recent poll data I've seen indicates the contrary. Gallup just released a poll that shows that Obama's support among female voters is 51%, versus 38% for McCain. Not only does he have this 13-point lead over McCain, but his support among women is very close to Hillary Clinton's (52% against McCain). Obama's numbers among married women have come up--now tied 45-45--and his numbers among unmarried women are at 57% Obama, 32% McCain.

    And here's the link, so you can see for yourself:
    http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/Obama-gains-women-voters-after-Clinton-departure/321840/

    In an article in the LA Times on June 6, the reporter said that a national poll done in late May showed that Obama had the support of 62% of Latinos, compared to 29% for McCain. This was comparable to Clinton's numbers in a match-up against McCain.

    As to unhappy Clinton supporters who go to McCain: I know there are some, because I saw the Daily Show last night, which featured two women who are so displeased with the sexism directed at Clinton that they have organized a pro-McCain effort. Unfortunately for them, Jon Stewart spoke about their efforts in the report that followed his discussion of the allegations about John McCain referring--in public--to his wife as a "painted trollop" and using an extremely offensive term to describe her.

    The message was clear. Women who are looking for a candidate to support, now that Hillary Clinton is out of the race, should perhaps give thoughtful consideration to where McCain stands before making their decision.
  38. South Paw from Montreal, Canada writes: A J from Canada writes: From time to time, I've seen comments referencing polls that show that McCain will pick up substantial numbers of Clinton supporters, thus causing Obama to lose. I don't recall ever seeing a link to such polls, however, are we provided with info about when the poll was done. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Similar results from a WSJ poll today with respect to Clinton supporters. To Sen. Obama's advantage, the Journal/NBC poll results seem to debunk two widely held conclusions from the Democrats' nomination contest. Exit polls of Democratic voters suggested many of Sen. Clinton's supporters wouldn't vote for Sen. Obama in November if he is the Democratic nominee. In particular, pro-Clinton Hispanics were generally thought to be cold to Sen. Obama. In the poll, however, voters who chose Sen. Clinton in the primaries said by a 3-to-1 ratio, 61% to 19%, that they plan to vote for Sen. Obama over Sen. McCain in November. "Hillary's embrace of Obama really made a difference," Mr. Newhouse says. By 62% to 28%, Hispanic voters support Sen. Obama. "That does not bode well for Republicans" in the Southwest, the Republican pollster added, in swing states such as Nevada, New Mexico and Colorado, where Hispanic voters are numerous enough to tip the result. Sen. McCain, who comes from a state with a large Hispanic population and has favored liberalizing policies toward illegal immigrants, has hopes of matching Mr. Bush's record of winning more than 40% of Hispanic voters. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121322048693265737.html?mod=hps_us_whats_news
  39. L Harder from Canada writes: The whole banking industry was hypnotized by the short term profits of sub prime. Not surprised a few democrats were involved.

    Every person of substance has a few negatives. If you accomplish something, likely there are a few negative unintended consequences.

    Don't know anything about this guy, but sub-prime was allowed to happen under the bush regime. They could have squashed it, if they had a bit of insight.
  40. Thomas D'Arcy McGee from Canada writes:
    Patrick King from Canada writes:

    "For postmenopausal women, for example, whether McCain is pro-life or pro-choice is a non-issue."

    Without a doubt the most misogynist posting I've read on this site in a long time.

    Patrick why would you assume that when a woman passes beyond the child-bearing years she no longer cares about women's basic rights in the area of reproductive choice?

    If human rights don't apply to them they have no interest in those rights?

    Don't judge others by your incredibly shallow standards Patrick.
  41. Michael Sharp from Victoria, Canada writes:

    Flakes ahoy!
  42. Duncan Morris from Salmon Arm, Canada writes: Patrick King misogynist at large. Good thing you didn't say postmenopausal women are "bitter" and cling to their Midol and Evening Primrose Oil while voting for McSame." I can hear your superstar Hillary with forced indignation yelling "shame on you Patrick King, shame on you!!" "This thing is far from over!"
  43. Patrick King from Canada writes: Thomas D'Arcy McGee from Canada writes: "Patrick King from Canada writes: 'For postmenopausal women, for example, whether McCain is pro-life or pro-choice is a non-issue.' Without a doubt the most misogynist posting I've read on this site in a long time. Patrick why would you assume that when a woman passes beyond the child-bearing years she no longer cares about women's basic rights in the area of reproductive choice? If human rights don't apply to them they have no interest in those rights?"

    From the anger in your write-up, I have reason to believe that you are actually a woman. Thomas is not a woman's name though. Are you a woman who's pretending to be a man?

    "Don't judge others by your incredibly shallow standards Patrick."

    Are you talking to yourself? It sounds like it.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top