Obama, Freddie & Fannie!!!

The NYT article has been proven false for one, and has left out a few facts, heres a link to the real money DeOrc, suprised you missed this.

Kinda odd that those in deep are those also on the " committee " for oversite huh?
Kinda funny that the O camp blasts McCain for Fannie ties, huh?

LOL, I could care less, just keepin it fair

from 1989 thru 2008 ( remember, Obama has been in only 3 years and has climbed to near the top )

http://pfds.opensecrets.org/092408.html

 

Good read Jack, but I dont see anything there that says McCains man did not recieve cash from the company's it only talks about the senators who recieved funds and not vast sums at that I was realy expecting to see that Obama had recieved hundreds of thousands LOL
I have to say that I do not agree with companies been able to buy influence no matter who the politician is, to me that is wrong. As for Obamas gang attacking McCain's gang, it seems to be a bit of a national sport with you guy's both sides do it with relish Again this is something I personaly would like to see a lot less of, it happens over here to a degree but nowhere like with you guy's.

 

McCains main man was on the fannie / freddie payroll (through his private company) all the way up to the crash because...well...obvious reason...you have a guy who is working for a senator, the main guy on McCains campaign...on your pay roll...you can do the math as to why fannie and freddie kept paying him.

 

But it has to be true...there's a link!!!!

 

Nah we read about it in the coffe grounds same as you do

 

McCains man has not taken any money since 2006 if you check Drusus. Thats when McCain introduced the Housing Reform thingy. BUT, yes, there is enough of this lobby business that you'd think BOTH candidates would stray from any discussion or pointing fingers.

 

I just dont think that they can help themselfs LOL

 

this morning I read in the newspaper that it was as recently as last month. It doesnt matter...I am sure most of them have ties...

I have a feeling Bush has pretty close ties as well the way he is pushing this bail out with almost no strings attached...I would say I just cannot wait to see him go but then I doubt if I will like what replaces him although I think one of those monkeys that use sign language could do a better job.

 

Nice, LMAO

I;m just worried the Obama Youth and Hollywood might pull it off.

 

I am still curious as to why Obama's involvement is more widely reported in the media? I have seen individual stories about Obama's take from Fannie/Freddie...Jim Johnson & Franklin Raines involvement...CEO's theft, etc but I am yet to see a story that ties all these crooks together.
I'm sure no one in Washington wants their dirty laundry aired but this story is huge because it involves HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of taxpayers dollars & one of the Presidential candidates is right, smack dab in the middle of it!!

 

What exactly is Obamas involvment in this? from the link that Jack provided I see he recieved $105,849 in campaign funds from the company, is this correct? That is hardly a world shattering contribution, so he has two guy's working on his team who had very close ties to the firm, is he now guilty by association?
If he has been involved in some other way, what is it?

 

I think they are saying that Obama recieved money from them...It must be okay to have people associated with the firm in ones employ because McCains number one man (the man who has his ear more than most) was on the payrole up until relatively recently...he had not worked for the firm for some time but continued to recieve money from them while working for McCain.

 

I'll try to make this one short.

I suppose if enough digging is done we'll find a lot of people on BOTH sides of the campaign with ties to Fannie and Freddie. Simple formula really. Money + Politicians = Greed.

Bottom line we have a huge problem and we need to solve. A blank check is not the solution for this.

If I open a store and it fails miserably it's my fault. Take a large "store" and it fails miserably and we just bail 'em out?

I'm going from memory on something Drusus pointed out so let me know if I'm wrong Drusus.
Let them fail. In the long run it's their own damn fault. Let smaller firms jump in to fill void.
Sure it would be tough and take time but in the long run we aren't being asked for more taxes and jobs will be provided/saved as things start to turn.

I'm afraid it would require more regulation to prevent it from happening again but get Freddie and Fannie out of the picture. Let 'em rot. They deserve it

 

Mark the calander folks. Clembo and I are in 100% agreement on this.

If we can do this without letting the average American take a financial hit, the " rescue " has been successful. If we include pork and earmarks, we have failed and it's biz as usual.

Clembo. I am tossing a bone here. Smartest thing you have said in months.

 

Well Clembo, perhaps you should go into politics now that we have influenced you so to practical conservatism

 

Toss the bone. Politics need to be turned aside and we just need to fix it.

Drusus got me rolling. He pointed out the obvious.

 

I agree clembo...honestly, do people think that if these giants fall there wont be a thousand companies scampering to fill the void? hell, that need alone might help the economy as new or smaller companies take over where the corrupt goliath fell. Without doubt there will be a recession, but I think there will be a recession regardless...we will have to tough it through and I would rather pay 700 billion to help those honest citizens who struggle because of it and help them make it through to the other side then just dump it in the laps of those who caused it...

 

Chop these corpses up and sell the assets and liabilities to the high bidder on the open market. One thing that infuriates me is that these companies were just incompetent. They bought lots of mortgages, some high risk, some not so...some of them defaulted...others didn't. This is traditionally good safe business. They could have trimmed the fat and dead bits, cut losses...but they just didn't...they could, even now, trim the fat but they honestly said they didnt have a processes or the will to go do that kind of work.

So let others do it...they buy chunks of these high risk / default notes (along with those that arent so high risk) and they are given tax incentives to do this. when the market recovers and people are buying houses again...it will be a good investment...people defaulting on a mortgages has traditionally been a great deal for the holder...they can make quite a bit of money selling a house three times after the buyers default. They just cant sell them these days after the default. Even if you are not praying for the person to default, they can be sold and money can be made down the line.

I would enter into a deal where I purchase a chunk of them, with an understanding the taxes will remain very low (or even non-existant for a time) until a market recovery....

 

( links provided for De Orc )

100 Million $100,000,000 for A.C.O.R.N. ???
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/25/kill-the-bailout-more-acorn-funding/

They are trying to load this bill with earmarks and pork.

Harry Ried trys to slip in a drilling/oil shale ban just days before the current ban expires all the while telling us he now supports drilling and shale exploration.
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/2...lion-stimuluspaloozaoil-shale-ban-plan-fails/


The feds put a hold on Obama advisor Franklin Raines Fannie stock bonus, so he is now suing to get his bonus...? link
http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2007/07/16/fannie_mae_exec_wants_his_bonus_back/

 

Sorry Jack I dont see what any of those story's have to do with saying that Obama helped to bring down Freddie & Frannie?
All I see is that he recieved $105,849 in campaign funds in your initial link, perhaps I am missing something here.
With the ACORN I am assuming that because Obama has a link with the orginisation it is been sugested that he has some how arranged for them to be up for this rather large sum!!
I have no idea what the second story has to do with Obama and the third is one of his advisers sueing for compensation, wether this is right or wrong is suerly for the court to decide and again does Obama get any of this money?