See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

1. Bigger Than Enron: Bailout for Fraud-Ridden Fannie Mae | OpenMarket.org
2. Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator

Trackback URL

Comments

1. #1
   On July 14th, 2008 at 10:10 am, meatpieandtatters said:

   Please don’t sully the name of MOAB confusing the earth’s natural beauty with a banker-contrived cluster blunder.

2. #2
   On July 14th, 2008 at 10:15 am, locomotivebreath1901 said:

   “U.S. Gub’mint marches closer to nationalized mortgage industry.”

   The lone voice of reason came from Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson when he told the congress critters (last) week:

   “For market discipline to be effective, market participants must not expect that lending from the Fed, or any other government support, is readily available,” Paulson said. “For market discipline to effectively constrain risk, financial institutions must be allowed to fail.”

3. #3
   On July 14th, 2008 at 10:28 am, pueblo1032 said:

   Boy, it seems the powers that be in DC just do not listen to the GREAT UNWASHED, in flyover country… The AMERICAN PEOPLE are opposed to a BAILOUT. But MSM, and the less than 5% of BORROWERS near or in FORECLOSURE are driving this bus. I hate to say it, but maybe it is time to vote them ALL OUT. Maybe the NEW elected POLS will realize that they do have a BOSS, it is called the VOTING PUBLIC…

4. #4
   On July 14th, 2008 at 10:31 am, pueblo1032 said:

   #2

   DITTO!!!

   Also markets(as in HOUSING)need to be allowed to Correct themselves!!!

5. #5
   On July 14th, 2008 at 10:48 am, Cosmo said:

   While you’re at it, government, go ahead and bail out Sallie Mae–actually, call it a “targeted bailout”: You can pay off the student loans I took out for my MBA in order to make myself more marketable in a competitive economy–four years ago.

   Why not? You’re bailing out speculators who have gotten stuck flipping houses–some with nine or ten in inventory now. What exactly have they contributed to the economy? *crickets chirping*

6. #6
   On July 14th, 2008 at 10:49 am, WarEagle82 said:

   The US government creates the problem and then throws more money at it. And the free market gets blamed when government intrusion into the market is the very problem to begin with.

   These two “corporations” have been part of the patronage system for a long time and now “the chickens have come home to roost!” Wait, am I allowed to say that?

7. #7
   On July 14th, 2008 at 11:04 am, Ahh a Lion! said:

   Ahh, capitalism - or the remnants left over after 90 years of fraud and corruption. What we have now is corporatism, where the transnationals control the government. Private interests control our monetary and foreign policy, and have been socializing the losses racked up by an absolutely bankrupt system. It’s time to wake up here, the government hates you and cares only for your control. I really hope people start realizing that the Federal Reserve and Treasury Department are absolutely run by private interests - this bailout of their cronies in Fanny and Freddie (and every other financial institution) should cement that this is the case.

8. #8
   On July 14th, 2008 at 11:09 am, Ahh a Lion! said:

   Re: locomotivebreath1901
   Paulson also has been saying that the treasury department has a “Strong-dollar policy”. Paulson is a liar and a fraud, his rhetoric sounds great, but in practice he is just an empty suit beholden to the Federal Reserve.

   Paulson is also looking for congressional approval to buy shares of Freddie and Fannie. Take a moment to think about that.

9. #9
   On July 14th, 2008 at 11:29 am, Excessive Moderate said:

   It’s easy to heap opprobrium on the heads of fools - the unqualified, the irresponsible and the flippers caught in their own vice, but I would say that we are not seeing a bailout for their sake. There are hidden speculators here, and these folks absolutely should’ve known better. They are the buyers of all these mortgage-backed securities on Wall Street.

   These investors threw billions into the market, and they knew that the subprime bubble was built on sand. Normally the investor class gets rewarded because it bears risks, but no more, apparently; even they want a risk-free socialist paradise, if they can get away with ripping us off. Surely it’s cheaper to buy a congress-weasel than it is to suck it up.

10. #10
    On July 14th, 2008 at 11:30 am, Alphonse said:

    Reagan proved debt doesn’t matter. Now is the time for a massive reduction in taxes to boost the economy and enable people to pay their mortgages.

11. #11
    On July 14th, 2008 at 11:39 am, IndependentTom said:

    It seems the collectivists in government are up to their old tricks again. The cronyism that is rampant inside the D.C. beltway is alive and well.

12. #12
    On July 14th, 2008 at 11:42 am, Rogue Cheddar said:

    I’d hold out my hand, but I know I would only get poop in it, so I go back to work every day. Why does the convernment feel so compelled to help those that are to big to fail. Screw em! Nobody’s too big to fail! These banks and lending companies deserve the right to fail just like everybody else! It is not the governments job to save them from themselves, especially from using the tax dollars confiscated from the great unwashed!

13. #13
    On July 14th, 2008 at 12:11 pm, expres12 said:

    This is the biggest taxpayer ripoff in the history of the world. I kid you not.

14. #14
    On July 14th, 2008 at 12:21 pm, secondsight said:

    Grim prediction: they will pay for this by taxing 401k’s, IRA’s and Roth’s. They’re Democrats, they know where the money is.

15. #15
    On July 14th, 2008 at 12:35 pm, Ahh a Lion! said:

    Re: secondsight
    It’s not Democrat vs. Republican here, they have both bought in fully to this bankrupt system. Most likely this will be financed through inflation and debt financing through our friends in China/UAE/Saudi Arabia.

16. #16
    On July 14th, 2008 at 1:13 pm, lgm said:

    The government does lots of things to encourage personal home ownership, including the mortgage tax deduction and support for Fannie Mae. Should we take those back?

17. #17
    On July 14th, 2008 at 1:16 pm, Silkyinfamous said:

    A government who houses, and feeds the lazy, and now it bails out companies when they screw up. Sounds like Socialism to me.

18. #18
    On July 14th, 2008 at 1:39 pm, Ahh a Lion! said:

    The government does lots of things to encourage personal home ownership, including the mortgage tax deduction and support for Fannie Mae. Should we take those back?

    While I love my mortgage tax deduction, the principal behind it is completely flawed. Government should not be in the business of incentive-izing anything. If the tax credit were simply to be abolished it would translate into a massive tax hike for 10’s of millions Americans, but if our government actually followed it’s founding principles, we wouldn’t have an income tax to begin with.

19. #19
    On July 14th, 2008 at 2:02 pm, md1964 said:

    IMO..if the Gov’t has to bail out ANY Company..(Not that I think they should ever do it..but we all know they will to protect their own a$$es).. then the Gov’t should seize all/100% of the Personal Assets of each and every member of the Board Members and executives.

20. #20
    On July 14th, 2008 at 3:29 pm, Militant Bibliophile said:

    The government has no choice. I don’t like it any more than ya’ll, but over the years, Fannie and Freddie have become the linchpins of the mortgage industry. They are what allow us to have our current mortgage and financial system. If the gov’t were to let them fail, the loss of confidence in the US economy would be disastrous, and we could look forward to the collapse of probably most of our mortgage (and possibly all) banks as foreign and domestic investors rush to pull their money out; it would be 1929 all over again. What’s more, it would probably mean the job of every congressman and hanger-on as a furious (and broke) public came howling for their heads, and you KNOW we can’t have that! /s

    I DO NOT LIKE the situation and am of the opinion that it is largely self inflicted, what with the gov’t allowing/encouraging the over centralization of mortgage lending in Fannie and Freddie (decentralization would have meant less individual home ownership, but since it’s irresponsible home lending that got us into this mess…), but to quit cold turkey would entail a crash that I’m not sure I’d want to live through. A better idea might be to swallow the bailout (painful on the pocketbook, but survivable) and then wean Fannie and Freddie out of the central role they play in the mortgage industry with an eye towards possibly eliminating them all together. Pipe dream, I know, but that’s what I’d do if I were king.

21. #21
    On July 14th, 2008 at 10:15 pm, love2rumba said:

    On July 14th, 2008 at 1:13 pm, lgm said:
    The government does lots of things to encourage personal home ownership, including the mortgage tax deduction and support for Fannie Mae. Should we take those back?

    True encouraging home ownership is good LGM, but this current situation is beyond understanding…how can anyone in their right mind make out a home loan without checking for income?..I mean this is stupid. Both parties have had their hands in this mess… regulatory wise and it appears that lenders themselves have been greedy to the point of self -destruction…and the rest are just expected to just pay for it???

22. #22
    On July 14th, 2008 at 10:17 pm, love2rumba said:

    What’s more, it would probably mean the job of every congressman and hanger-on as a furious (and broke) public came howling for their heads, and you KNOW we can’t have that! /s

    Yep you watch how fast the government would suspend the Constitution, particularly the Second Amendment…

23. #23
    On July 14th, 2008 at 10:42 pm, Dimsdale said:

    On July 14th, 2008 at 1:13 pm, lgm said:

    The government does lots of things to encourage personal home ownership, including the mortgage tax deduction and support for Fannie Mae. Should we take those back?

    Yes! The prices for homes would drop like a rock, more than they are now. And nobody mentions that the housing market crash has made housing affordable for lower income folks. That’s a good thing.

    Yes, people that bought too much house, figuring that the equity would save them were fools. So were those who bought houses on speculation.

    None of them deserve a penny of my money. I paid PMI when I couldn’t quite make a 20% down payment (that means I paid for insurance to protect the bank if I defaulted. Nice, huh?). I took a fixed rate and refinanced when it was timely to do so. Adjustable rate? For short term ownership only. Interest only mortgages? Foolish.

    If anyone couldn’t understand the reams of paperwork they were signing when they financed a house didn’t deserve one in the first place.

    Dodd would do better to arrange some “VIP” financing for regular people, not just himself.

    Now if we could just pry your elitist butt out of your rent controlled apartment, lgm, maybe you would view reality with a clear head.

    Isn’t it remarkable that all the truly expensive housing is in the liberal meccas of NY, CA etc?