Democrats on Freddie and Fannie

[jreeves]

Some of these same idiots are now blaming everyone but themselves.


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs[/ame]

 

[elvis]

rahm emanuel is on Obama's staff.

 

[Annie]

Saw this earlier today:

Why The Media Ignores The $400 Billion Fannie And Freddie Bailout

Media Still Covering Up The $400 Billion Fannie And Freddie Scandal (FNM, FRE)
Joe Weisenthal|May. 8, 2009, 3:39 PM
Tags: Fannie and Freddie, Housing, Financial Crisis, Bailout, AIG

This morning, Fannie Mae (FNM) announced that it had lost another $23 billion in the quarter, and would have to call down $19 billion more in taxpayer support. It also said that it would face losses as far as the eye can see.
Do you know how much we've committed to backstopping Fannie and its partner-in-crime Freddie Mac (FRE)? $400 BILLION! Back in February that was doubled from the original $200 billion.

But the news of the quarterly loss is getting hardly any attention. Nothing here at the NYT business section, for example. Nothing at the blogs that were going nuts when AIG was revealed to have paid out bonuses back in March....

 

[jreeves]

rahm emanuel is on Obama's staff.

Rahm Emanuel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Rahm Israel Emanuel[1] (born November 29, 1959) is an American politician currently serving as White House Chief of Staff to President Barack Obama.

Makes you feel good about the prospects of a prosperous Obama administration, huh?

 

[jreeves]

Saw this earlier today:

Why The Media Ignores The $400 Billion Fannie And Freddie Bailout

Media Still Covering Up The $400 Billion Fannie And Freddie Scandal (FNM, FRE)
Joe Weisenthal|May. 8, 2009, 3:39 PM
Tags: Fannie and Freddie, Housing, Financial Crisis, Bailout, AIG

This morning, Fannie Mae (FNM) announced that it had lost another $23 billion in the quarter, and would have to call down $19 billion more in taxpayer support. It also said that it would face losses as far as the eye can see.
Do you know how much we've committed to backstopping Fannie and its partner-in-crime Freddie Mac (FRE)? $400 BILLION! Back in February that was doubled from the original $200 billion.

But the news of the quarterly loss is getting hardly any attention. Nothing here at the NYT business section, for example. Nothing at the blogs that were going nuts when AIG was revealed to have paid out bonuses back in March....

No the media isn't biased for godsake its only 400 billion dollars we have given them.

 

[elvis]

rahm emanuel is on Obama's staff.

Rahm Emanuel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Rahm Israel Emanuel[1] (born November 29, 1959) is an American politician currently serving as White House Chief of Staff to President Barack Obama.

Makes you feel good about the prospects of a prosperous Obama administration, huh?

should we be surprised? Look what pastor he and his family sat under for 20 years.

 

[DiveCon]

Saw this earlier today:

Why The Media Ignores The $400 Billion Fannie And Freddie Bailout

Media Still Covering Up The $400 Billion Fannie And Freddie Scandal (FNM, FRE)
Joe Weisenthal|May. 8, 2009, 3:39 PM
Tags: Fannie and Freddie, Housing, Financial Crisis, Bailout, AIG

This morning, Fannie Mae (FNM) announced that it had lost another $23 billion in the quarter, and would have to call down $19 billion more in taxpayer support. It also said that it would face losses as far as the eye can see.
Do you know how much we've committed to backstopping Fannie and its partner-in-crime Freddie Mac (FRE)? $400 BILLION! Back in February that was doubled from the original $200 billion.

But the news of the quarterly loss is getting hardly any attention. Nothing here at the NYT business section, for example. Nothing at the blogs that were going nuts when AIG was revealed to have paid out bonuses back in March....

No the media isn't biased for godsake its only 400 billion dollars we have given them.

shhhh, your not supposed to know this

 

[jreeves]

Saw this earlier today:

Why The Media Ignores The $400 Billion Fannie And Freddie Bailout

No the media isn't biased for godsake its only 400 billion dollars we have given them.

shhhh, your not supposed to know this

Nothing going on here. Don't you remember those evil greedy AIG executives and those evil Hedge fund executives?

 

[DiveCon]

No the media isn't biased for godsake its only 400 billion dollars we have given them.

shhhh, your not supposed to know this

Nothing going on here. Don't you remember those evil greedy AIG executives and those evil Hedge fund executives?

yup, fannie/freddie/cra had NOTHING to do with the financial meltdown

just move along, nothing to see here

 

[justabubba]

y'all do recognize this re-infusion of taxpayer dollars is to cover the bad investments Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made ... government backed gambles, 'heads i win, tails you lose', is a better description. only a fraction of the GSE losses resulted from declines in their conforming loan portfolios
just another example where the profits are privatized and the losses were socialized

 

[jreeves]

y'all do recognize this re-infusion of taxpayer dollars is to cover the bad investments Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made ... government backed gambles, 'heads i win, tails you lose', is a better description. only a fraction of the GSE losses resulted from declines in their conforming loan portfolios
just another example where the profits are privatized and the losses were socialized

and your point is?

 

[American Horse]

No the media isn't biased for godsake its only 400 billion dollars we have given them.

shhhh, your not supposed to know this

Nothing going on here. Don't you remember those evil greedy AIG executives and those evil Hedge fund executives?

It's all very simple: It's really the fault of greedy wall street financial CEO's and de-regulation by the Republicans, and, oh yes, of course the promotion of the Glass-Steagall Act being replaced by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act led by Republican Senator Phil Gramm and other Republicans which brought us the financial melt-down....That's the Democrat's and the MSM's story and their sticking to it.

And the real cause, Fanny and Freddy and the promotion by willing politicians, mostly Democrats but also some Republicans of sub-prime mortgage loans and their subsequent infection of the financial system world wide that.... well..... that's what will be forgotten; because it's just too complicated to be catch-phrased in words like "greedy wall street bankers" and "de-regulation crazed republicans"

Those who control the language win the argument. That's why debate today is called "bickering"; it's just another way of telling those who offer up difficult solutions to problems to "just shut up"

 

[elvis]

shhhh, your not supposed to know this

Nothing going on here. Don't you remember those evil greedy AIG executives and those evil Hedge fund executives?

It's all very simple: It's really the fault of greedy wall street financial CEO's and de-regulation by the Republicans, and, oh yes, of course the promotion of the Glass-Steagall Act being replaced by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act led by Republican Senator Phil Gramm and other Republicans which brought us the financial melt-down....That's the Democrat's and the MSM's story and their sticking to it.

And the real cause, Fanny and Freddy and the promotion by willing politicians, mostly Democrats but also some Republicans of sub-prime mortgage loans and their subsequent infection of the financial system world wide that.... well..... that's what will be forgotten; because it's just too complicated to be catch-phrased like in "greedy wall street bankers" and "de-regulation crazed republicans"

Those who control the language win the argument. That's why debate today is called "bickering"; it's just another way of telling those who offer up difficult solutions to problems to "just shut up"

The Glass Steagall act, yes. The act that CLINTON signed.

 

[jreeves]

shhhh, your not supposed to know this

Nothing going on here. Don't you remember those evil greedy AIG executives and those evil Hedge fund executives?

It's all very simple: It's really the fault of greedy wall street financial CEO's and de-regulation by the Republicans, and, oh yes, of course the promotion of the Glass-Steagall Act being replaced by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act led by Republican Senator Phil Gramm and other Republicans which brought us the financial melt-down....That's the Democrat's and the MSM's story and their sticking to it.

And the real cause, Fanny and Freddy and the promotion by willing politicians, mostly Democrats but also some Republicans of sub-prime mortgage loans and their subsequent infection of the financial system world wide that.... well..... that's what will be forgotten; because it's just too complicated to be catch-phrased in words like "greedy wall street bankers" and "de-regulation crazed republicans"

Those who control the language win the argument. That's why debate today is called "bickering"; it's just another way of telling those who offer up difficult solutions to problems to "just shut up"

Even though their was prominent Republicans calling for tougher regulation, as is evidenced in the Youtube. I agree with you for the most part though.

 

[justabubba]

y'all do recognize this re-infusion of taxpayer dollars is to cover the bad investments Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made ... government backed gambles, 'heads i win, tails you lose', is a better description. only a fraction of the GSE losses resulted from declines in their conforming loan portfolios
just another example where the profits are privatized and the losses were socialized

and your point is?

well the topic IS

Democrats on Freddie and Fannie

that it was not the fannie mae and freddie mac lending that got those organizations in trouble, such that the government had to bail it out
it was bad investments in derivatives, over-rated securitized mortgages and bad futures gambles that caused the GSEs to be upside down
just like freeing the government backed banks to do things outside the lending arena, but still having the backing of uncle sugar
profits were massive for the principles during the manufactured good times
and when the losses came, only the taxpayers took it on the chin
this will soon be recognized as the world's largest swindle. the shrub was too dumb to know it

i can't do dot-to-dot on this board. apologies for being unable to present in a medium more familiar to you

 

[jreeves]

y'all do recognize this re-infusion of taxpayer dollars is to cover the bad investments Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made ... government backed gambles, 'heads i win, tails you lose', is a better description. only a fraction of the GSE losses resulted from declines in their conforming loan portfolios
just another example where the profits are privatized and the losses were socialized

and your point is?

well the topic IS

Democrats on Freddie and Fannie

that it was not the fannie mae and freddie mac lending that got those organizations in trouble, such that the government had to bail it out
it was bad investments in derivatives, over-rated securitized mortgages and bad futures gambles that caused the GSEs to be upside down
just like freeing the government backed banks to do things outside the lending arena, but still having the backing of uncle sugar
profits were massive for the principles during the manufactured good times
and when the losses came, only the taxpayers took it on the chin
this will soon be recognized as the world's largest swindle. the shrub was too dumb to know it

i can't do dot-to-dot on this board. apologies for being unable to present in a medium more familiar to you

So you don't think that the Ceos of Freddie, Fannie and Democrats who blasted government regulators were to blame for the failures of Fannie and Freddie?

 

[jreeves]

y'all do recognize this re-infusion of taxpayer dollars is to cover the bad investments Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made ... government backed gambles, 'heads i win, tails you lose', is a better description. only a fraction of the GSE losses resulted from declines in their conforming loan portfolios
just another example where the profits are privatized and the losses were socialized

and your point is?

well the topic IS

Democrats on Freddie and Fannie

that it was not the fannie mae and freddie mac lending that got those organizations in trouble, such that the government had to bail it out
it was bad investments in derivatives, over-rated securitized mortgages and bad futures gambles that caused the GSEs to be upside down
just like freeing the government backed banks to do things outside the lending arena, but still having the backing of uncle sugar
profits were massive for the principles during the manufactured good times
and when the losses came, only the taxpayers took it on the chin
this will soon be recognized as the world's largest swindle. the shrub was too dumb to know it

i can't do dot-to-dot on this board. apologies for being unable to present in a medium more familiar to you

Sorry I don't interpret Idiot, maybe next time you could write in coherent sentences with a point?

 

[elvis]

I think it was the repealing of the Glass-Steagall act by Clinton that caused the meltdown. Does anyone know if they are putting that back in place?

 

[justabubba]

I think it was the repealing of the Glass-Steagall act by Clinton that caused the meltdown. Does anyone know if they are putting that back in place?

clinton's bill eh?
why did it carry the name of its republican authors:

Graham-Leach-Biley Act of 1999

let's see how veto-proof that "clinton" bill was:

The final bill resolving the differences was passed in the Senate 90-8 (1 not voting) and in the House: 362-57 (15 not voting).

clearly, this was not something to lay at clinton's feet. hell, monica would have been in the way

i do believe that glass-steagall will be re-implemented. it was but a part of the multi-faceted reasons of the meltdown. if we seek to identify the singular cause, that would have to be the opportunity given over to wealthy people to exploit incompetent governance

 

[justabubba]

and your point is?

well the topic IS

Democrats on Freddie and Fannie

that it was not the fannie mae and freddie mac lending that got those organizations in trouble, such that the government had to bail it out
it was bad investments in derivatives, over-rated securitized mortgages and bad futures gambles that caused the GSEs to be upside down
just like freeing the government backed banks to do things outside the lending arena, but still having the backing of uncle sugar
profits were massive for the principles during the manufactured good times
and when the losses came, only the taxpayers took it on the chin
this will soon be recognized as the world's largest swindle. the shrub was too dumb to know it

i can't do dot-to-dot on this board. apologies for being unable to present in a medium more familiar to you

Sorry I don't interpret Idiot, maybe next time you could write in coherent sentences with a point?

ok. i will start typing slower so that you can keep up