As the $700,000,000,000.00 bailout was passed, more than just a few thoughts came to mind..
The first and most important question seems to be: are there more zeros in the cash prize’s just approved by congress or, are there more zeros in congress itself? I’m torn on that one..
The idea of a “bailout” of these government entities Freddie and Fannie, proves in a rather linear fashion that the bigger our government is, or the bigger it is allowed to become, the more that will inevitably go dreadfully wrong. Please keep that paradigm in mind as you consider the following: Barack O’Carter wants the government, the same government which he believes screwed up so badly with Katrina, the same government which he believes bungled the War in Iraq, the same government that EVERYONE knows destroyed the public school system, (this could go on for days..) that that same government should now be in charge of the Socialized Medicine plank of his termite riddled progressive platform..
This “bailout” needs to take the “free market” responsibilities AWAY from the government. They tried to over involve the government with Fannie and Freddie and as we saw, they failed miserably. So their answer was to make government even more responsible, intrusive and appreciably bigger. While we are at it, why don’t we just give Bill Clinton another cherubic intern and a cigar, lets give William J. Jefferson another deep freeze and lets give Michael Moore another Moon Pie..
I’ve heard a number of progressive pule-ers claiming that borrowers were “tricked” into signing for these loans that were destined to fail. Let me get this straight: You are the night shift manager at the Dunkin Donuts and someone wants to “lend” you the money for a three quarters of a million dollar house.. The deception/denial factor is somewhat universal on both sides of that equation..
So loans based on “fairness” as opposed to income, “inclusiveness” as opposed to work history and “equality” as opposed to collateral failed in mysteriously large numbers.. Who would have believed it? Isn’t it great to know that those who live within their means regardless of its “unfairness and exclusiveness”, will now be paying off the “loans” made by Fannie and Freddie. “Loans” to those who live inordinately beyond their means because of the carefully camouflaged and concealed “Constitutional rights” to a home and an illogical number of credit cards…
What was Wall Street’s response to this “give government another chance to ruin what they ruined in the first place” program? The Dow dropped another 159 points. Barney Frank, chairman of the House financial services committee and potential progressive physician said, “We will be back next year to do some serious surgery to the financial structure.” Two points: First, architects deal with structures and second, Barney’s statement is about as encouraging as hearing that Dr. Jack Kevorkian wants to drop by for a nocturnal visit..
The circular illogic of the whole “bailout” necessity seems to conveniently boomerang back to one Congressman, Fabulous Barney Frank. This is certainly not the first time that Barney has been under the unethical gun, so to speak, but this one turns out to be considerably more costly to the middle class than his other run ins..
Back in 1990, Barney found a new “friend” in the back of a magazine. This is not the kind of magazine that your grandparents might have on their coffee table. Barney’s new “friend” was named Steve Gobie. Steve, allegedly unbeknownst to Ol’ Barney, was running a male escort service right out of Barney’s tax payer provided apartment in Washington D.C. It seems that the “one way street” of homosexuality saved Ol’ Barney because the House just gave him a “boys will be boys” reprimand, a kind of a slap on the limp wrist, if I may.. Were any Republicans to partake of such deviant debauchery, well they would just Mark Foley or Larry Craig them right out of the building..
Back in July of 2008, Barney said, “I think this is a case where Fannie and Freddie are fundamentally sound, that they are not in danger of going under.. I think they are in good shape going forward.” Why was Barney so optimistic about the future of Fannie and Freddie? Because his ex “interpersonal alternative lifestyler”, Herb Moses, was the financial assistant director for “product initiatives” for Fannie Mae. In other words, “Moses helped develop many of Fannie Mae’s affordable housing and home improvement lending programs.” In short, Barney has a major conflict of interest.
Moses was at Fannie from 1991-1998, during that same time Barney was on the House Banking Committee, which, Ta-daah!, oversees Fannie Mae.. Barney and Herbie “broke it off” right after Herbie ended his stint with Fannie. They both managed to “break it off” inside the middle class just for laughs and giggles.
Frank has been trying to lay down a suppressing fire of progressive projection by blaming the Republicans for these federal failures, but it was Frank who has been deviously deflecting lawmakers from both sides of the aisle from scrutinizing Fannie and Freddie. Barney has succeeded in “scrutinizing” the middle class.
Barney worked aggressively to eliminate as many restrictions as possible relative to the mortgages on multi family homes even though they were defaulting at up to “five times the rate of single family homes.”
Frank even worked against his own political party when in 1994, the Department of Housing and Urban Development tried to reign in Fannie. Bill Clinton himself said, “I think the responsibility that the Democrats have may rest more in resisting efforts by Republicans in Congress or by me when I was President, to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.” President Clinton was being a bit too generous in his identification of “the Democrats” as being responsible. There is nothing wrong with laying the blame where it belongs. Right on the saggy shoulders of bathhouse Barney Frank.
The bottom line appears to be that Barney Frank is in need of investigation and more than just a little jail time. However, I would suggest that Barney be placed in an all women’s facility not the typical all male institution. Incarceration is supposed to be a punishment, not a paradise..