Regarding Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Regulation The Republicans Were in Favor, the Democrats Not

  •  April 2, 2009


The thing the Bush Administration and the Republicans didn’t do was take this to the American people. I think that was a wise move. I think if Bush had used the power of the bully pulpit to get some public attention on this he would have set off a crisis of no confidence in these institutions.
Ultimately that’s what happened and we can blame the Democrats for obstructing needed reforms.
It just drives me nuts that crooks like Schumer and Barney Frank aren’t being blamed for their culpability in this matter.

Tags:


«
»
  • http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/america_is_back/#c397018 Dino2

    Mike, read up. These people are nothing but liars.

  • carrick

    Mike that link of mine contains 2004 CSPAN footage.

    This isn’t new data, it’s old.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/america_is_back/#c397018 Dino2

    I see the stems are at it again. Nevermind that the majority of subprime loans came from Countrywide and outfits like that who sold the loans directly to Wall Street. Nevermind that Wall Street encouraged more and more loans so they could securitize and sell them for huge profits until the music stopped. Nevermind that the impetus for the loans was Wall Street and not Fannie & Freddie.

    Forget that the republicans controlled Congress and that no filibusters were threatened or made. Forget that Fannie & Freddie paid republican lobbyists to get republicans to kill the regulations.

    AP IMPACT: How Freddie Mac halted regulatory drive

    Internal Freddie Mac budget records show $11.7 million was paid to 52 outside lobbyists and consultants in 2006. Power brokers such as former House Speaker Newt Gingrich were recruited with six-figure contracts. Freddie Mac paid the following amounts to the firms of former Republican lawmakers or ex-GOP staffers in 2006:

    -Sen. Alfonse D’Amato of New York, at Park Strategies, $240,000.

    -Rep. Vin Weber of Minnesota, at Clark & Weinstock, $360,297.

    -Rep. Susan Molinari of New York, at Washington Group, $300,062.

    -Susan Hirschmann at Williams & Jensen, former chief of staff to House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, $240,790.

    I wonder how democrats stopped the republicans from regulating Fannie & freddie but couldn’t keep them from impeaching Clinton or any number of things the republicans did?

    Of course, the story is complicated, which is why the stems have such a hard time understanding it. I’ve tried educating the dumbasses but they can’t pull themselves away from the security blanket of ignorance. Pity.

    Here’s more interesting backstory on why their version is busllshit:

    At the time, Fannie and Freddie were allies in the president’s quest to drive up homeownership rates; Franklin D. Raines, then Fannie’s chief executive, has fond memories of visiting Mr. Bush in the Oval Office and flying aboard Air Force One to a housing event. “They loved us,” he said.

    So when Mr. Falcon refused to deep-six his report, Mr. Raines took his complaints to top Treasury officials and the White House. “I’m going to do what I need to do to defend my company and my position,” Mr. Raines told Mr. Falcon.
    Days later, as Mr. Falcon was in New York preparing to deliver a speech about his findings, his cellphone rang. It was the White House personnel office, he said, telling him he was about to be unemployed.

    His warnings were buried in the next day’s news coverage, trumped by the White House announcement that Mr. Bush would replace Mr. Falcon, a Democrat appointed by Bill Clinton, with Mark C. Brickell, a leader in the derivatives industry that Mr. Falcon’s report had flagged.

    But I thought bush was concerned about F&F?

    Over the previous two years, the White House had effectively set the agency adrift. Mr. Falcon left in 2005 and was replaced by a temporary director, who was in turn replaced by James B. Lockhart, a friend of Mr. Bush from their days at Andover, and a former deputy commissioner of the Social Security Administration who had once run a software company.

    On Mr. Lockhart’s watch, both Freddie and Fannie had plunged into the riskiest part of the market, gobbling up more than $400 billion in subprime and other alternative mortgages.

    Even if Freddie & Fannie had been DISSOLVED, the meltdown still would have happened since most loans were made, securitized and INSURED (by AIG) without F&F ever getting near them.

    But you stupid shits knew that already. You just think you can convince people that republicans were innocent little lambs in all this.

    Which is why I enjoy knowing that lying sacks of shit republicans are going to suffer in this downturn. So will their kids. We’re not een halway down. Long way to go. Your houses have already lost value. Your retirements too. Your kids will have a much bleaker future thanks to your ignorance and republican voting record.

    Makes me smile. :)

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    Fannie and Freddie created the market for these mortgage securities that led to the meltdown.

    You know they did.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    I’m suggesting that Senate Republicans were not committed enough to the issue or did not place sufficient priority on the issue to take the matter farther.

    Well you have to consider the ramifications of bringing it up and failing. Aside from the political damage that would be done (not inconsequential) you have to worry about making the case that this is necessary and then NOT getting it accomplished.

    Don’t you think that would have undermined confidence in the system?

    why not lay at least some of the blame at the feet of those who actually created, molded and shaped the toxic assets?

    I don’t think you understand what happened. Fannie and Freddie made it known that they would buy mortgages of a certain nature. They then created the toxic securities and sold them to financial institutions.

    They absolutely DID create the mess.

    They further guaranteed the securities. They weren’t supposed to imply that they were guaranteed by the US government but many people assumed that they were. And when it came down to it, that’s what happened is it now.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/america_is_back/#c397018 Dino2

    For blocking reform of Fannie and Freddie.

    Democrats didn’t run Congress.

    Here’s what Mike Oxley, at the time the republican chairman of the committee overseeing F&F:

    “The problem with those guys at the White House, they had all the answers and they didn’t think they had to listen to anyone, including the Treasury secretary,” Mr. Oxley said in a recent interview. “They were driving the ideological train. He was in the caboose, and they were in the engine room.”

    And don’t forget this little gem about the republican lobbying firms that lobbied republicans to leave F&F alone:

    AP IMPACT: How Freddie Mac Halted Regulatory Drive

    Internal Freddie Mac budget records show $11.7 million was paid to 52 outside lobbyists and consultants in 2006. Power brokers such as former House Speaker Newt Gingrich were recruited with six-figure contracts. Freddie Mac paid the following amounts to the firms of former Republican lawmakers or ex-GOP staffers in 2006:

    –Sen. Alfonse D’Amato of New York, at Park Strategies, $240,000.

    –Rep. Vin Weber of Minnesota, at Clark & Weinstock, $360,297.

    –Rep. Susan Molinari of New York, at Washington Group, $300,062.

    –Susan Hirschmann at Williams & Jensen, former chief of staff to House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, $240,790.

    (Those are all republicans.)

    Doesn’t matter anyway. The blame goes to Wall Street. Because:

    Fannie & Freddie don’t originate loans. Fannie & Freddie didn’t force banks to make loans. Fannie & Freddie didn’t force Wall Street to buy the loans. Fannie & Freddie didn’t force investment houses to securitize the loans. Fannie & Freddie didn’t force the rating agencies to give the loands stellar ratings. Fannie & Freddie did’t tell AIG to insure the loans.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/america_is_back/#c397018 Dino2

    The Democrats squelched those efforts.

    Republican lobbyists squelched those efforts. Even the republican committee chairman says so. $11 million paid to ex-republican lobbysits says so.

    Republicans controlled Congress. As we’re seeing now, one party with a same party President has a lot of power. The republicans did nothing.

    Wouldn’t matter though, the rush to issue subprime mortgages was catalyzed by Wall Street’s demand, not F&F. You remember that, right? Bear Stearns, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Bros? Buying all those loans to securitize and sell to investors? You people never can answer that little detail. The investment houses had no rules governing them, no regulations forcing them ot invest in subprime loans. And AIG was under no pressure to sell CDS on the MBSs.

    You can claim to win this argument but haven’t. That last paragraph defeats you every time.

    Do explain Countrywide, too. The biggest issuer of subprime loans. Why’d they do it? At whose urging? Who were they selling them to?

    The meltdown is due to the unholy alliance between banks and Wall Street made possible by deregulation promoted by republicans, conservatives and Wall Street democrats in the Clinton adminstration. I gave you that last one.

  • Bat One

    I would argue that the financial institutions bought F&F’s mortgages and bundled them into investment vehicles for sale to hedge funds, pension funds, etc. F&F didn’t do the bundling and subsequent sale…

    Mike,

    You are mistaken here. Fannie and Freddie buy mortgages and then either hold those mortgages in their own portfolio, or bundle and securitize them, selling the resulting bonds to replenish their own funds. That is the business they are in.

    What everyone ignores about the GSEs is their own secondary marketing and the management of their respective trillion dollar portfolios, including the buying and selling of mortgage-backed securities.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    Mike, that was an interesting read. Thank you.

    It’s amazing the herd mentality involved in the financial market.

    Also the rating agencies are not innocent parties in all of this either.

  • Bat One

    Funny how the left always blames someone without explaining how it happened.

    Someone trying to explain something should probably first understand it himself. Works better that way.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    Should I infer that the Republicans didn’t feel strongly enough about the issue to even try

    They couldn’t get it past the filibuster. And again bringing it up AND not getting it passed would probably be worse than doing nothing as it would undermine confidence in the market.

    Of course the Republicans are getting all of the blame when NOT ONE Democrat came out in favor of reform of Fan and Fred.

    Our favorite liberal from Canadia joins in.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    Mike I think you’re mistaken over who created the securities.

    USA Today.

    CHICAGO — Behind their down-home names, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are so vital to the economy that the government scrambled to offer them a lifeline. But what exactly are they, and what do they do?

    They are the engines behind a complex process of buying, bundling, slicing and selling mortgages that remains a mystery even to millions of Americans whose home debt passes through their hands.

    They also guaranteed them. The way I understand how it worked after this was that an hedge fund would buy up a bunch of these mortgages. They would then use them for collateral to borrow money (commercial paper) and then buy up MORE mortgage securities.

    The interest rate on the mortgage securities was more than the short term cost of money they were borrowing. So the more they borrowed, the more they made, the more they borrowed again.

    Now you could say that these hedge funds should/could be regulated, but how do you do that in the global marketplace? Can’t they just move to some country where the regulations let them do what they want?

    The problems all started in the mortgage market. Fannie and Freddie were quasi government agencies that dominated that market.

    Now that doesn’t mean we owe anything to these hedge funds or banks that were doing the same thing. It also doesn’t mean we owe anything to someone who bought an house they couldn’t afford.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/america_is_back/#c397018 Dino2

    Fannie and Freddie created the market for these mortgage securities that led to the meltdown.

    Wall Street created the demand by buying as many subprime loans as they could. The higher the risk, the better the price they received from investors. Countrywide, the biggest loan-granting outfit, had nothing to do with Fannie & Freddie.

    Poor stupid Whistelr thinks he discovered the explanation that he can use to blame democrats who were out of power the whole time the bubble was building. That;s the beauty of being a conservative. You don’t really have to think critically.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/america_is_back/#c397018 Dino2

    Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis

    Fannie, the Federal National Mortgage Association, and Freddie, the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp., don’t lend money, to minorities or anyone else, however. They purchase loans from the private lenders who actually underwrite the loans.

    It’s a process called securitization, and by passing on the loans, banks have more capital on hand so they can lend even more.

    This much is true. In an effort to promote affordable home ownership for minorities and rural whites, the Department of Housing and Urban Development set targets for Fannie and Freddie in 1992 to purchase low-income loans for sale into the secondary market that eventually reached this number: 52 percent of loans given to low-to moderate-income families.

    To be sure, encouraging lower-income Americans to become homeowners gave unsophisticated borrowers and unscrupulous lenders and mortgage brokers more chances to turn dreams of homeownership in nightmares.

    But these loans, and those to low- and moderate-income families represent a small portion of overall lending. And at the height of the housing boom in 2005 and 2006, Republicans and their party’s standard bearer, President Bush, didn’t criticize any sort of lending, frequently boasting that they were presiding over the highest-ever rates of U.S. homeownership.

    Between 2004 and 2006, when subprime lending was exploding, Fannie and Freddie went from holding a high of 48 percent of the subprime loans that were sold into the secondary market to holding about 24 percent, according to data from Inside Mortgage Finance, a specialty publication. One reason is that Fannie and Freddie were subject to tougher standards than many of the unregulated players in the private sector who weakened lending standards, most of whom have gone bankrupt or are now in deep trouble.

    During those same explosive three years, private investment banks — not Fannie and Freddie — dominated the mortgage loans that were packaged and sold into the secondary mortgage market. In 2005 and 2006, the private sector securitized almost two thirds of all U.S. mortgages, supplanting Fannie and Freddie, according to a number of specialty publications that track this data.

    In 1999, the year many critics charge that the Clinton administration pressured Fannie and Freddie, the private sector sold into the secondary market just 18 percent of all mortgages.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/america_is_back/#c397018 Dino2

    Fannie and Freddie are to blame.

    Only in your fantasies.

    Fannie & Freddie don’t originate loans. Fannie & Freddie didn’t force banks to make loans. Fannie & Freddie didn’t force Wall Street to buy the loans. Fannie & Freddie didn’t force investment houses to securitize the loans. Fannie & Freddie didn’t force the rating agencies to give the loands stellar ratings. Fannie & Freddie did’t tell AIG to insure the loans.

    Fannie & Freddie are a red herring for conservatives.

  • Bat One

    Give it a rest, Swish! Your hackneyed cliches and cut ‘n’ paste bullshit were exposed as irrelevant delusions long ago. Pick a subject you know something about.

  • Bat One

    Dino,

    Your same old shit is just as wrong today as it was the first time you posted it weeks ago.

    They purchase loans from the private lenders who actually underwrite the loans.

    The underwriting guidelines are set by the GSEs themselves. A conventional mortgage loan is actually approved for purchase before it is closed.

    It’s a process called securitization, and by passing on the loans, banks have more capital on hand so they can lend even more.

    No, this is NOT securitization and obviously the McClatchey writers, Goldstein and Hall, have no idea what they’re talking about.

    In an effort to promote affordable home ownership for minorities and rural whites, the Department of Housing and Urban Development set targets for Fannie and Freddie in 1992 to purchase low-income loans…

    Not exactly! Those targets were set by Democrats Cisneros and Cuomo in 1992, 1996, and 2000, and the same legislation that allowed those targets also allowed the 2 HUD Secretaries to force the GSEs into the sub-prime market.

    in 2005 and 2006, Republicans and their party’s standard bearer, President Bush, didn’t criticize any sort of lending…

    More bullshit from the witless. In 2001, 2005, and 2006 Republicans tried to rein in the GSEs bringing them under tighter federal regulatory control. The Democrats squelched those efforts.

    One reason is that Fannie and Freddie were subject to tougher standards than many of the unregulated players in the private sector…

    Phooey! The reason the GSEs cut back on their sub-prime investing is because, Johnson, Raines, Gorelick, and Howard, Democrats all, got caught in their fraudulent accounting, which included hiding losses off balance sheet just like ENRON, while boosting paper profits by buying more and more sub-prime securities for the GSE portfolios. Fannie Mae alone was forced to pay a fine of over $400 million.

    McClatchey is no more authoritative or factual in its reporting than George Soros’ Media Matters.

  • MikeAdamson

    Carrick…I know that the Administration wanted reform as far back as 2001. I’m not questioning the desire of many, if not all, Republicans for reform and I’m not doubting the lack of support for reform in Democratic circles. I’m observing that bills were proposed, noises were made and nothing was done. Bat suggests the threat of filibuster blocked Senate action and I’m suggesting that Senate Republicans were not committed enough to the issue or did not place sufficient priority on the issue to take the matter farther.

    If it makes it any clearer, I believe that the Democrats are more culpable than are the Republicans for the failure to bring reform to F&F but I can’t accept the image of bloodied and beaten Republican bravely standing up for Americans against the excesses of the GSE’s because that doesn’t appear to be what happened.

  • atease

    Where are the liberal mouthpieces..?

    This is why we are in trouble and Frank, Waters, Dodd, et al MUST be held accountable. They should be frog marched out of D.C. straight to jail.

    Pitch forks and shovels. Surround the capitol and don’t let these bastards back inside to make any more laws.

    atease

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    he can use to blame democrats

    For blocking reform of Fannie and Freddie. Which they did.

  • MikeAdamson

    Aside from the political damage that would be done (not inconsequential) you have to worry about making the case that this is necessary and then NOT getting it accomplished…

    I agree that is a political calculation that any party has to make from time to time and I’m not really knocking the GOP’s decision not to proceed so much as I’m knocking the current perception that the Republicans did everything they could to get reform done. They decided not to go to the barricades over F&F reform, right? It’s not a big point I’m making but somebody has to point this stuff occasionally.

    Fannie and Freddie made it known that they would buy mortgages of a certain nature. They then created the toxic securities and sold them to financial institutions.

    I would argue that the financial institutions bought F&F’s mortgages and bundled them into investment vehicles for sale to hedge funds, pension funds, etc. F&F didn’t do the bundling and subsequent sale, the investment banks did and then they created derivative products based on those securities. I said it’s complex and I meant it but the difference between our positions is not merely semantic or one of emphasis…F&F do bear some responsibility but they aren’t alone nor even the most significant actors.

    I just came across this today…not directly relevant but it does explain a lot.

  • Bat One

    Mike,

    This article from the NYT in 1999 not only demonstrates that it was Clinton era Democrats who pushed the GSEs into the sub-prime market, but also the objections of those on the Right who warned of the pitfalls, like AEI’s Walliston,

    From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us…If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.

    And even the Times itself voiced some concern,

    In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980′s.

    For a more detailed, and certainly objective look at the pressures that pushed Fannie and Freddie to lower their credit standards and enter the sub-prime market there is this article from The Village Voice, hardly a rightwing clarion, detailing how successive Clinton HUD Secretaries Cisneros and then Cuomo, used 1992 “reform” legislation to require the GSEs to move into the sub-prime business.

    Franklin Raines,

    We have not been a major presence in the subprime market,” he said, “but you can bet that under these goals, we will be.

    Andrew Cuomo, who required that 50% of GSE mortgages go to “low income” and minority borrowers,

    GSE presence in the subprime market could be of significant benefit to lower-income families, minorities, and families living in underserved areas.

    Fannie and Freddie took what had been a niche market in the mortgage business and gave it mass appeal. When that pipeline was cut off after the fraud of Raines, Johnson, Gorelick and Howard came to light, the private sector moved to fill the void, providing an alternative pipeline… something it could not do before hand because of the cost/interest rate advantage that the GSEs had with their implicit federal guarantees that firms in the private sector don’t enjoy.

  • MikeAdamson

    Thanks for your corrections/responses. I’m up to my eyeballs today so I’ll have to come back later, hopefully to successfully weasel out of my comments whilst leaving my essential position intact…failing that I’ll have to fall on my sword. Either way, it should be entertaining. ;)

  • Bat One

    If this,

    In 1999, the year many critics charge that the Clinton administration pressured Fannie and Freddie, the private sector sold into the secondary market just 18 percent of all mortgages.

    is that “last paragraph” you’re talking about, you’ll have to do a whole lot better. In the first place, I’ve already demonstrated that the McClatchey reporters have no idea what they’re talking about, so you’re gonna need something a lot more credible than their say so to back it up.

    Once you can provide that, I’ll be glad to explain the rest of it to you… slowly… using little words…

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/america_is_back/#c397018 Dino2

    Fannie & Freddie don’t originate loans. Fannie & Freddie didn’t force banks to make loans. Fannie & Freddie didn’t force Wall Street to buy the loans. Fannie & Freddie didn’t force investment houses to securitize the loans. Fannie & Freddie didn’t force the rating agencies to give the loands stellar ratings. Fannie & Freddie did’t tell AIG to insure the loans.

    Fannie & Freddie are a red herring for conservatives.

  • robert108

    The Dems were able to keep it from coming to a vote with their obstructionism in the Senate. It’s also a matter of President Bush having to use up his political capital fighting the Dems and the terrorists in Iraq. The Spendocrats wanted to cut and run and the terrorists wanted us to cut and run, but President Bush stood firm for defending our national interest and security.

  • Bat One

    Mike,

    I’d hoped that this conversation wouldn’t get so clogged with toxic assertions as it did… effluent run-off from the rabid Left.

    I’ve got to be out the rest of the afternoon as well. Take care.

  • http://www.rabidamerican.net/ Rabid American

    Yet another fumble by the Right-Wing….

    The Right-Wing citizens have been screaming about this since the first farcical Congressional grilling….

    “The Meek” shall inherit Shitzola! Act like a doormat and everyone will wipe their feet on ya!!

    Note to RNC: DAMMIT ALREADY!!! FIGHT BACK, YA WIMPS!!!!

  • atease

    I was wondering how the Republican majority could fail to pass their bill but then I learned at the end of the report that they didn’t bring it to the Senate floor for a vote.

    Should I infer that the Republicans didn’t feel strongly enough about the issue to even try or was it Shumer’s infamous mind control abilities? Credit to the Administration for trying to get Congressional action but it seems that the will to effect reform simply wasn’t strong enough…IMO of course.

    Stupid ass comments like this are going to get folks hurt in the future.

    This comment that the bill would not be brought to the floor was made on May 25th 2006 and McCain was the sponsor. At that time, we could not get a judge approved because of the tactics of the left. Yes, they are/were legal. So you want to bust this whole story by saying it is the republicans fault by not bringing this f’ing issue up for vote in 2006 when it was brought up originally in 2001? Don’t piss on my shoe and tell me it’s raining jackass. The left interfered to the point of liability.

    Your defense of Frank is curious.

    atease

  • MikeAdamson

    I was wondering how the Republican majority could fail to pass their bill but then I learned at the end of the report that they didn’t bring it to the Senate floor for a vote.

    Should I infer that the Republicans didn’t feel strongly enough about the issue to even try or was it Shumer’s infamous mind control abilities? Credit to the Administration for trying to get Congressional action but it seems that the will to effect reform simply wasn’t strong enough…IMO of course.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    Right Fannie and Freddie created the securities in the first place.

  • Bat One

    What’s really curious is that I didn’t mention Frank at all let alone defend him.

    As you might expect, Barney Frank took no small amount of credit for the Democrats defeating the Republicans’ attempt to “cut off housing opportunities to the poor and minorities.” But the bill actually passed the House in spite of Frank’s attempted obstruction, but was held up in the Senate by the filibuster threat from Dodd and Obama.

  • carrick
  • MikeAdamson

    What’s really curious is that I didn’t mention Frank at all let alone defend him. I’m not letting the Democrats off the hook, just saying that Congressional Republicans don’t seem to have placed as much priority on the issue as some are claiming now.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    Fannie and Freddie are to blame.

  • MikeAdamson

    TW

    The Government created these BS securities with their GSE’s fannie and freddie.

    That didn’t happen. I acknowledge that the issue is complex and that F&F have turned out to be financial timebombs but why not lay at least some of the blame at the feet of those who actually created, molded and shaped the toxic assets? I’m not asking for a political conversion to the dark side, just some recognition that private interest players have much to answer for.

  • Bat One

    The two Senators who quietly threatened to filibuster the Fannie/Freddie Reform in 2006, the reason the bill was not brought to the Senate floor after it passed the Banking Committee on a straight party line vote, were “Friend of Angelo” Chris Dodd and rookie Barack H. Obama.

  • END GAME

    Buy the time this is over i want to see Washington dc laid to waist the symbol of our corrupt past and the bodies of every politician entombed within. I promise you a change you can see and believe in. network with family and friends get ready and be prepared for an independence day that will be remembered for the next thousand years……If it lies kill it, and then kill the bloodline.

    Have a nice day >:)

    God bless America and god damn the federal government

    Posted on multiple sites

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/america_is_back/#c397018 Dino2

    The constems sound like parrots.

    “FANNIE & FREDDIE! FANNIE & FREDDIE! SQUAAAAAAWWWWK!”

    You know that I saw the Fannie Mae truck in my neighborhood, making loans to homeless people. Yep, saw the whole thing. And Barney Fag was right there making them sign for the loans! Uh huh! And there was Barney’s buttbuddy Herb throwing buttloads of cash out the back door while Nancy Peloooosi held a gun to Bear Stearn’s head and forced them to buy the bad loans! Right behind her was Dodd forcing his benefactors at AIG to write insurance policies on the mortgage-backed securities! The whole time the republicans were begging, pleading for them to STOPPPPP!!!! while bush shook his fist and demanded they slap F&F with some REG-YOU-LAY-SHUNS!

    Yeppers, the republicans tried to save us but were powerless. Uh huh. Simply powerless. Afraid for their lives, they was. Uh huh. Uh huh.

  • bill-tb

    You have to be as dumb as a post to have voted for Obama. A really dumb post at that.

  • MikeAdamson

    Dino2

    Mike, read up. These people are nothing but liars.

    I don’t think that’s a fair comment. I think “these people” are selective in identifying causes and effects of events…and who isn’t when it comes down to it. Let he who is without sin etc. etc.

  • MikeAdamson

    I wasn’t following the story back then so I can only rely what I read and see now. The Administration wanted reform, the Democrats didn’t, the House passed a bill, the Senate didn’t vote on one because of the threat of a filibuster.

    You’d have been better served if the Democrats supported reform. OTOH, did the Senate Republicans do everything they could to get the bill or did they back down in the face of a threatened filibuster? It seems to me that a Senate majority has to pick and choose its fights and the Republican majority chose not to fight this one…that’s really all I’m saying.

    I’ll add that a system that appears to require 60% for virtually all bills is pretty screwy IMO.

  • atease

    MikeAdamson,

    You are being disingenuous at best.

    just saying that Congressional Republicans don’t seem to have placed as much priority on the issue as some are claiming now.

    Look at the videos again. The left continued to say everything was good while the right was saying STOP.

    We need to elect folks with brains and not appeal.

    atease

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    The Government created these BS securities with their GSE’s fannie and freddie.

    Their GSE’s fannie and freddie guarenteed these securities.

    The government created (because of liberal policies) the problem that crashed the market.

    Now the ‘tards in the financial sector shouldn’t get bailed out of their stupidity because they had the ability to accurately judge the market as well.

    But ignoring what caused the problem is stupid. Insisting that the same bad behavior get started up again is more stupid.

    Dinostem’s right along with that.

    Funny how the left always blames soemone without explaining how it happened.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/sparkiearbuckle sayanything-81

    didn’t you see the 19 page powerpoint dino? its only fannie and freddies fault, the cool circular designs said so.

Create a SAB Readerblog


Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus

Blog Advice and Support
Installs and Upgrades
Theme Modifications
Custom Plugins
Theme Design
Conversions and Relocations
Hacked Site Recovery
Mobile Apps Development