WOW.....bailout plan voted down....

Regarding Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac and Obama's advisors, I think Franklin Raines is the one you are seeking. He was at Fannie Mae, and basically mis-stated earnings in order to drive up share prices and get his bonuses. Enough so that, if I recall correctly, one auditor basically said no reasonable person would make the financial assumptions shown; they weren't merely stretching GAAP, they were totally outside it.

Now, this whole house of cards has been a long time coming. Truth is, you can take it back as far as you want. It is based on entitlement, the lack of personal responsibility, greed, and even a healthy dose of good intentions.

I work in the affordable housing industry, on the apartment side. For the past several years, the increasing focus has been to promote more and more homeownership. The word "right" was tossed around very casually...in fact, nobody has a "right" to own a home. As much as anything, that's what pisses me off - people seem to have this laundry list of "rights" that has never existed before...but they have no responsibility when it's time to pay for those rights.

We can start wherever we'd like, because there is plenty of blame to go around.

I'm glad the bill didn't pass. No matter what happens, the portion of the American public who pays their bills, lives reasonably within their means, and works to establish some long-term plan is going to suffer...I know this for a fact. We are going to get bent over. Our houses are worth less, our retirement plans take the hit, maybe our pension funds go completely belly-up if State- or Union-sponsored, depending on the industry.

But, if I'm going to now have to take the punishment, I would at least like to know that the people who are the cause of this, who have a new house, two new cars, and credit cards maxxed out, the bankers and investment houses who ignored every common sense guideline in the name of profit, and the CEO's who committed fraud, ran companies in the ground and got hundreds of millions in pay and severance packages, are going to face the music, even if only a little.

Without that, we are only reinforcing a victim concept and the lack of any personal responsibility or accountability, which means that in the long run, this will happen over, and over, and over, and over.
 
Last edited:
The most important thing that a lender can do is to make sure that he lends money to those who will repay it.

Rules that worked well in the housing market were made more lax in the 1990's.

The main reason that they were made more lax was a concerted effort to increase minority home ownership.

Lenders were forced to lend money based on these lax laws. If they did not they would be sued by a host of government agencies, community activist groups like ACORN, and even individuals who were denied home loans.

Lender still would not have knowingly made bad loans but Fannie and Freddie told the lenders that they would buy the mildewy paper. Since they would make money writing the loans, and be rid of them before they fell apart, many lenders pushed their lending to the absurd limits.

Fannie and Freddie then repackaged the loans and sold "instruments" based on these loans to investors who bought them because they knew Fannie and Freddie were backed by our uncle, SAM.

All of this activity caused an increase in upward pressure in the housing market over all. People borrowed money for housing that was over inflated in price. People borrowed against equity that wasn't really there.

The underlying bad paper foundation of all of this "wealth" started generating more and more heat as it composted. The foundation of the paper house eventually failed. The whole thing collapsed.

Even Bill Clinton saw that Freddie and Fannie were going wrong with respect to lending practices. He stated that, (not exact wording) "The Republicans are not the problem, I can get enough of them to go along with a fix. The problem is that I cannot get enough Democrats on board."

Hearings were held in which the people who were pointing out he danger of lax mortgage lending practices were viciously attacked by Democrats, particularly minority Democrats waving race cards.

Bush was one of those who spoke against the lax lending practices. McCain made an effort in 2005. There was no hope of reform

The Democrats had the bragging points (as did Republicans). "Look how minority housing has increased." Republicans (and some Democrats) who saw the danger were too afraid of the race card to do anything meaningful.

WHO IS TO BLAME?

Democrats- 50% (This happened because of a concerted political drive to get more minorities into housing, overwhelmingly Democrat)
Republicans- 25% (Most Republican politician saw the problem but some did not and some did not have the spine to resist the fan made out of Democrat race cards.)
Business corruption-17% (businesses do what they are allowed to do but some were corrupt above this)
Dumb borrowers-8% (no matter what a bank will lend you you are dumb if you borrow too much)

I am glad that the bill did not pass-

The bill did not-
1) Fix blame and prosecute.
2) Protect taxpayers position in bailout. (past bailouts often made profits for the taxpayers)
3) Roll back the lax lending laws.
4) It did include funding for community organizing groups that helped cause the problem including ACORN. (the laws should do the opposite and forbid government payments to such groups)

Good for those mostly Republican House members who stood up and voted "Nay!" A significant number of Democrats also voted against.

Obama worked for ACORN when he was a rabble rous.... er ...... "community organizer", he also received the second to most money from Freddie and Fannie. Before he became just a Chicago machine politician in Washington, while still in the Illinoise legislature, Obama always delivered for his bioggest contribtors like developer Rezco (sp?).

BOB
 
my statement was "show me proof that the people that wrecked Fannie Mae and Bernie Mack and Freddie Mac are, as stated, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERS for Obama....thats pretty damning if its true yet I have not heard a single Republican stand up and righteously state...."THESE PEOPLE are on Obama's staff and will be directing the economy if he wins"...and then end it by staring into the camera and yelling ..."END OF F'ing STORY AMERICA".....and yes I watch Foxx so I'm sure not to miss it since as is also stated ALL of the other news stations would never show something that discredits Obama....

So here it is again....someone that claimed that these people are on Obama's staff as Financial Advisers show me proof of that...irrefutable proof....and when you post it here send it to FOXX and also the McCain so they'll start using GOOD REASONS why people shouldn't vote for Obama and not just the crap like the mis-quoted..."I will stand with the Muslims".....

Steve
 
my statement was "show me proof that the people that wrecked Fannie Mae and Bernie Mack and Freddie Mac are, as stated, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERS for Obama....thats pretty damning if its true yet I have not heard a single Republican stand up and righteously state...."THESE PEOPLE are on Obama's staff and will be directing the economy if he wins"...and then end it by staring into the camera and yelling ..."END OF F'ing STORY AMERICA".....and yes I watch Foxx so I'm sure not to miss it since as is also stated ALL of the other news stations would never show something that discredits Obama....

So here it is again....someone that claimed that these people are on Obama's staff as Financial Advisers show me proof of that...irrefutable proof....and when you post it here send it to FOXX and also the McCain so they'll start using GOOD REASONS why people shouldn't vote for Obama and not just the crap like the mis-quoted..."I will stand with the Muslims".....

Steve
Click to expand...
It is difficult to show proof that someone is, or is not, an adviser to a campaign. I'm guessing that there IS some fact to this, and that some, if not all are no longer with the campaign. Trying to clean up afterwards.

If it were truly false I'm pretty sure that there would be something on Snopes about it. If you take money from someone, associate with and take meetings with these same people, it would be difficult to say that they are not your political advisers.

Most people have blinders on regarding one thing or another. Some people don't think smoke means anything. I think that you are a good party loyalist.

Bob
 
Last edited:

I ask then; if the dems wanted this so much, if it was the right thing to do, and if the repubs are so "unpatriotic" as the hag Pelosi has suggested, then why did 95 dems vote against it. And if it did include money for ACORN, then why did any repubs vote for it.

Hitch [/QUOTE]


It's fairly simple Hitch - Pelosi wanted it to pass with enough Republicans supporting it so her members in tought re-election campaigns could claim that they voted the measure down like their constiuents had requested. I have heard that close to 90% of the calls by constituants were for the House to vote no for the bailout. Pelosi wanted it to pass but knew she didn't have the votes on the democratic side. What to do you must ask. Get the Republicans to vote for it and then blame them when the time comes for re-election...."I didn't vote for the bailout but my Republican counterparts did...." type of thing.

Simple rules in Congress, never ever bring a vote to the floor unless you know the outcome. She knew what was going to happen when the vote was taken and was looking for someone to blame. Surpise surprise it was the Republicans. Wait until you see the next bill that comes in front of the House - I'll bet my last nickel it will be one pork laden bill. Good thing to prevent this is that the OUS markets and the US market didn't plunge today or the pressure on the Republican to pass the House measure would have been intense.

Almost half of Barney "hey theres a prostitution ring going on in my basement and I don't know anyting about it" Franks House financial Services group voted no. What dioes this say?

My opinion, and not a popular one is to suspend the Sarbanes Oxley act for a couple of weeks and watch the flood of money enter the market. What this has done to the value of money for big corporations is horrendous. Can it completely and then redo the provisions protecting from fraud and not create a whole nuther group of oversight committee. If this doesn't work, reinstate it completely.

Mark W
 
Last edited:
course, this is all after the pig escaped, but, here is a simple way for us as individuals to deal with problems:
If you WANT something, but cannot afford to pay for it, then you don't NEED it.. CREDIT is one of the worse afflictions to strike this planet, next to barney,nancy,chuck and the other bleeding hearts!
There, i feel better already!
 
" I think that you are a good party loyalist" statement?

Never mind...lets save time....

If you "think" that I'm a loyal Democrat and my intent was to "defend" Obama then you are wrong....

My reason for asking was the fact that I'm tired of hearing things, deciding they are a reason for feeling a certain way about something, only to find out that the "truth" is something different...

So rather than basing my negative feelings towards Obama on a lie generated, by those that want to see him lose, because they couldn't come up with something that was true I prefer to with hold busting his ass over something that isn't true.....

CHIEF FINANCIAL ADVISORS would be listed on "official" websites.....the claim was made that the CEO of Fannie May IS the Chief Financial Advisor of Obama's campaign, and others were there in that capacity as well.....if that IS true as stated it would be viewable somewhere, (at least somewhere other than on some Right Wing nut jobs "I HATE OBAMA" cause I don't want a Arab/American to be President" blog)...and if it WAS once true but no longer is then that would show up somewhere too....that said I have been unable to fid any reference to it so I asked the people that said it to support it.....cause I REALLY DO want it to be true..

So what I "expect" is true is that this is one of those "I heard" things that gets circulated as the truth but that has never been vetted originally, and definately not when it is repeated.....TRUST ME...I wish to find every reason to dislike Obama so that I can confidently tell his supporters WHY they shouldn't support him, (other than "he said there was an article in Ebony and there wasn't"--WHO THE HELL CARES when there are so many more IMPORTANT reasons to vote against him).

Problem is that if I'm going to believe that the FANNIE MAE CEO Is/WAS his Chief Financial then I also have to believe that the FANNIE MAE head Lobbyist is on McCain's staff because that potential truth/potential lie, is also floating around in the cauldron of "he saids" that is the internet, (no proof offered but its there and just as damable IMO if it's true)....

So there ya go....I'm voting McCain come voting day even though I think Obama will win.....NOTHING would sway me to Obama short of a scandal involving McCain and an underaged person of either sex but I choose to want to KNOW THE TRUTH before I decide on basing my decision on "an issue".....

Call me crazy for not buying into every piece of tripe that is offered, from both sides, against the other.....and like I said, ESPECIALLY SO when there are so many "proveable" reasons to vote against him...

Steve
 
Last edited:
like yourself Mr. "self proclaimed" "I'm buying at prices not seen since '97"......(and good for you and them BTW)....but it ain't gonna last.....

Today was the last trading day of the Quarter and fund managers were going to do EVERYTHING within their power to make themselves look good.....stick around til the next Bail Out is announced as "we got this bitch nailed down" and it fails, or once it passes its so "FOS" from the manipulation by both parties that its worthless as to fixing the problem....

Sell short tomorrow bargain hunter....many will....

Steve
 
very true, very true. This up and down ride is starting to make me sea sick. I'm just hoping that with all of the downs mixed in with the few ups, we are going to hit the bottom soon and the tide will slowly start to rise again.

When I said that I was buying at 97 prices, I meant that my 401 was buying at lower levels. I only wish I had the money (and balls) to play in the market. All of my extra income for the past 2 years has been going towards paying off the house - I really want to get that done. Of course, I treat myself to a new gun or a hunting trip once in a while...
 
and my future happiness as a retiree was based on market trends I'd be so confused and conflicted that I wouldn't know whether to crap or wind my watch.....broke one day and then you got a good deal of it back the next...scary way to live and a lot won't do it that way for long....they'll get scared, pull out of the market, stuff the mattress with what they were able to get out of it and just stop spending cause they know "thats it--thats all their is"....

Wish I had listened to me 6 mos. ago when I was trying to decide it if made sense to pay off the house or use the money somewhere else....I'd definately feel better, at least in the sort term if all I really had to worry about was accruing taxes and insurance......that'll teach me not to listen to me.....can't walk by a mirror anymore without calling the guy looking out at me a DUMB ASS.....

Steve
 
Steve, prior to posting that "copied" information I tried to vett it. I couldn't find anyting either and I found it very odd. The fact is, I have heard it on Fox at least twice over the past month, I read it...albeit tucked in mid-article somewhere at least twice in US News and I think the Journal. Today's Newsweek(the stench of liberal rag prevails in my bathroom of choice today....and I keep threatening to "cancel the FN subscription" to which my wife says,"YOU ALWAYS SAY THAT"....I guess it's like a bad car crash, I can't look away)...as I was saying, today's Newsweek has a piece on page 6 regarding the McCain/Davis/Fannie money trail and in the last paragraph it states:

"One senior McCain advisor said the entire flap could have been avoided if the campaign had resisted attacking Barack Obama for his ties to the two former Fannie Mae executives, which the media to take a second look at Davis. "It was stupid" the advisor". "A serious miscalculation and an amateurish move". "

This suggests to me that this issue has been sanitized to some degree or at a minimum the damage was mitigated by quietly forgetting about it. Which I find stupid personally because to me, assuming it's true...it's a freakin' bombshell. And I want to believe it and frankly I do but I'm sure that there a lots of little nasty details that these campaigns know about each other and simply "don't go there" for obvious reasons.

I heard about Davis first thing this morning on Fox. I find it interesting that this is being compared to having the former executives that made out like Mexican bandits with a shit-ton of cash on your team. Not some measly $15K a month to some firm(does that even cover the wine bill?)but a genuine SHIT-TON! By my way of thinking there is no comparison. Sure, it's the principal but when a $100 million talks $15K walks as the old saying goes

The crux of this article is that Davis and the McCain campaign claim that Davis seperated from his firm Davis Manafort for this very purpose and that they really didn't do anything anyway which is sketchy of course(shocker....do any of these a-holes really ever do anything?). And furthermore, that the firm was being paid Davis' salary by the McCain campaign thereafter and that another company that Davis is an "investor" in and just so happens to have the same address as the office building as Davis-Manafort has been paid just shy of $1M for web work. Is any of this nefarious...I doubt it, just the way they do business. McCain obviously likes and trusts Davis.

You can read this "Periscope" at this link. http://www.newsweek.com/id/161218
 
Last edited:
IF it was true, even if they thought for a second that it was true, then they needed to be, and would have been, all over it....and if they could have proved it then I'd be grinning instead of saying that I thnk McCain is already beat, knows it, but can't admit it, and is just paying for a miracle....

If they have dropped it, if they are saying that it was a mistake then IMO there is no way thatt its proveable cause to have that gun in the arsenal would have been better than all of that other crap like, "he went to a Muslim School", "he wore traditional garb", "he didn't salute the flag", ad naseum......

I'm not so naive as to think that there might have been some behind the scenes stuff happen but there sure doesn't appear to be anything proveable to me and I'm through supporting innuendo's, half truths and outright lies when there's plenty of reasons that are vetted to base voting decisions on...

Interestingly while I was looking for proof that Obama was tied to the Fannie Mae exec's I found the following "seemingly credible" , (and particularly so given the lack of "I CALL BS" from the McCain Camp like the one that came immediately from the Obama camp.....

According to a review of Senate and House records McCain has 177 lobbyists, on his staff.

At least 83 have in recent years lobbied for the financial industry McCain now attacks.

These "advisors" seek favors and special treatment for investment banks, securities firms, hedge funds, accounting outfits, and insurance companies. Their clients have included AIG, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, and Washington Mutual.

McCain's chief political adviser, Charlie Black (JP Morgan, Washington Mutual Bank, Freddie Mac, Mortgage Bankers Association of America)

McCain's national finance co-chairman, Wayne Berman (AIG, Blackstone, Credit Suisse, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac)

McCain's campaign's congressional liaison, John Green (Carlyle Group, Citigroup, Icahn Associates, Fannie Mae)

McCain's veep vetter, Arthur Culvahouse (Fannie Mae); and McCain's transition planning chief, William Timmons Sr. (Citigroup, Freddie Mac, Vanguard Group)

Senator John McCain’s campaign manager was paid more than $30,000 a month for five years as president of an advocacy group set up by the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to defend them against stricter regulations, current and former officials say.

Now, I haven't verified this so it could be as INCORRECT as the information that you posted about Obama is but I think the point it made....if your going to accuse someone of being in bed with somebody that you might catch something from then you best not be sleeping with the same type of people yourself.....and maybe that right there is the reason that the Fannie Mae contact was dropped like it was.....the old "expose me and we both go down"....

Steve
 
Steve,

it is those money grubbers who will really help stabilze the economy in the long run.

They are the ones who have previously invested wisely and are flush with cash and are now in a position to cash in on those who have real assests worth millions, but are being drawn down by their stupid positions on these instruments that F/F were selling. Those other assests are still valuable so why not buy them and help them maintain their value?

Warren Buffet did...less the mortgage crap.
Barclay bank did....less the mortgage crap.

others are doing the same, it is this infusion of cash that will actually help. Any bail out is a waste since people are still and will continue to walk from the bad mortgages.

Your point on the end of the quarter though is a good one and tomorrow should be interesting.

Ray mentioned ARM's...When I bought my house I was flat out called an idiot since I would not take one. I and my wife insisted on a 30yr fixed, but the bank guy thought I was nuts. Several friends/family said the same thing....Damn glad I went with the gut on this one.

Interesting times...wonder if any of this would be happening if the elections were not in November....All to coicidental for me when you see major companies all fail about every 2 weeks....Rumors of tampering from the SEC are starting to leak out now too........
 
(and good for you), in the post....plus Jon and I like to mess with each other which was the main intent of my post....

As to ARM's...my first house was purchased with an ARM....scared me to death the day we signed the contracts and three years later, when we sold, was the happiest day of my life to that date.....hell I was still scared two years later that I had done that......

Steve
 
I refinanced with an ARM back in the early 90's. It was locked in for 3 years at 3 points below what a 15year fixed was. After 3 years I refinanced to a 30 year that was lower than the initial ARM rate. Built a bunch of equity that I used to purchase my lake property with a couple years ago when I refinanced again at a lower rate and took some of the equity for the purchase.
 
how in heaven's name did the state of mass manage to elect, and do it consistently, some of the biggest slimeballs on the planet?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top