Comment from yang
Posted: September 25, 2008 at 10:32 am

she’s not that bad to look at but hard to listen to :)

Comment from Maureen
Posted: September 25, 2008 at 9:03 pm

Sorry, that’s what makes America such a great place—-I can absolutely LOVE your blog (which I do) yet respectfully disagree with your choice for President, which I also do. Obama scares me more than McCain, so it’s the lesser of two evils that has my vote this year. And may God bless America, whatever the outcome!

Comment from Anonymous
Posted: September 26, 2008 at 9:11 am

Sigh. Well, I’m gonna have to respectfully say that if you can seriously say that Obama “scares you more” (always a good reason to vote for president, btw!) than the 35-40% chance of that woman becoming president, then there is really no hope at all for this sad country. After 8 years of the utter nightmare we have gone through, you would go and keep the same party, mindset, and voting pattern in power, and possibly put a complete fool into power should the cancer stricken old man fall off the throne?

I don’t get people who keep using this lesser of two evils strategy. Its like what they said with Kerry: “oh, he’s so stiff and boring.” So instead, you vote for Galactus the world ruiner?

That argument is akin to having two choices for baby-sitter, and saying “I dont know, this first guy looks like the kind of guy who’s gonna call his girlfriend and spend all night talking on my phone instead of watching the kids, so….I’m gonna go with the other guy.” The other guy being the naked man with prison tattoos who is masturbating into your potted plants.

God is certainly doing something to America, and it ain’t blessing.

Comment from Hakushaku
Posted: September 26, 2008 at 9:23 am

I don’t know who that handsome man is, but I like how he thinks!

Comment from yang
Posted: September 26, 2008 at 9:46 am

haha I like how he thinks too :P

Comment from Tom Sander….son..berg
Posted: September 26, 2008 at 9:50 am

I agree, three cheers for anonymous! What a guy!

Comment from Definately not Hakushaku
Posted: September 26, 2008 at 9:52 am

I concur! Your ideas are intriguing to me, sir, and would like to subscribe to your journal or newsletter.

Comment from Maureen
Posted: September 27, 2008 at 9:37 pm

“God is certainly doing something to America, and it ain’t blessing”…..

What a sad, bitter statement. Try telling that to someone who lives in a third-world country. Every American should count their blessings each and every day as they are endless! All you need to do is look around, open your heart, open your eyes.

Comment from Mike
Posted: September 28, 2008 at 1:41 am

This woman is a plain idiot. Apparently that is appealing to Americans as they have such a nice track record of voting for them.

Comment from Hakushaku
Posted: September 28, 2008 at 9:03 am

“Try telling that to someone who lives in a third-world country”

Hahaha, wow lady, so that’s what I’m supposed to base my vote on? Now THERE’S a good slogan for the McCain campaign!

“McCain/Palin 2008: Hey, we’re still better off than Namibia!”

Comment from Braden
Posted: September 29, 2008 at 7:19 am

Sorry, but I think McCain/Palin is a far SAFER choice for America than Obama/Biden.

Comment from Roberto
Posted: September 29, 2008 at 11:44 pm

Wow, I genuinely assumed you were joking. SAFER huh? In all caps? Is that some secret republican code? One side too “urban” for you guys? Wink wink

If you can honestly look at this Palin woman and decide she’d make a good president, then you have absolutely no business voting for anything, not even which restaurant to go to tonight.

This anti-intellectualism that runs rife with the right-wing has gone too far, if they think a pathetic beauty queen who barely managed to graduate from (THREE) colleges with a F-ing communications major has any business trying to tackle the most complicated network of political and economic problems this country has faced in 50 years. She is a buffoon, and the furthest thing from SAFE you could possibly vote for.

Graduate Magna cum Laude of Hardvard Law and president of their law review……or 6 year communications degree from a series of community colleges in Alaksa and Idaho. That should be all you need to see.

But of course, I forget all those “big city” eggheads don’t know what they’re talking about with their fancy degrees and “intelligence”, cause we needs to get rid of the politicians in Washington, and bring some down home folksy wisdom to the government! There’s the ticket!

Comment from Braden
Posted: September 30, 2008 at 6:41 am

Gee, I don’t know Roberto. I guess this is a good start:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7o84PE871BE&feature=related

Funny, I don’t remember reading about you thinking of Hillary as “that Clinton woman” back when she was on the playing field.

Correct me if I am wrong, but you certainly come off as a very “hateful” individual. I’ll even go as far to say that you’re also coming off as a bit…dare I say…insulting in your remarks toward me.

Interesting, it’s us “right wingers” who always get accused of coming off as hateful. To that, I am forced to say, “Pot Kettle Black” at you, Roberto.

By the way, Roberto, the term “right winger” didn’t come into pass until people like you labeled those of us who favor smaller government and freedom and liberties being the solution to the human condition. If that makes me a “right winger” as you so call it, then so bet it. I am glad I fit your description, sir.

I suspect you’ll lash back out at me Roberto, but then again, that’s something I’ve grown accustomed to whenever I present my political viewpoint.

All that said, it doesn’t take a “Republican” code to decipher all what I just said. And by the way, Roberto, I am a registered Independent. Just so you know.

Now … you were saying?

Comment from Bicarli151
Posted: September 30, 2008 at 8:58 am

Umm, he didn’t say Palin was stupid because she was a woman. He said she was a stupid woman, which I think the video posted above shows pretty clearly. Just sayin’

Clinton was qualified. She is not.

Comment from Anonymous
Posted: September 30, 2008 at 10:11 am

Hey Braden,

First of all, whatever point your trying to make, it’s a lot easier for people to understand if you actually look over what you wrote before submitting your comment. A term doesn’t “come into pass”, it comes to pass. Also, the phrase is “so be it” not “so bet it” as you so eloquently put it. I still haven’t decided who I’m going to vote for, but I do know that I wouldn’t want to share opinions with someone who doesn’t have the knowledge to express their opinion in a readable manner. Lastly, Palin is actually very dumb, look it up, it’s a fact. If you were truly independent, your unbiased mind could see that.

Comment from Roberto
Posted: September 30, 2008 at 10:39 am

Ahhh, the old paternalistic forum response approach, attempting to marginalize me as angry and irrational. Classic internet. Wonderful.

You’ll excuse my comments if they sound hateful, but that is because they can be accurately described as “filled with hate.” Hate and rage that the intellectuals and academics of our society, the people with the ACTUAL tools to run a government, have for 8 years been marginalized by a the naivete and ease of manipulation of a bunch of chest-thumping, paper-flag waving, ignorant gorillas in the middle states. People whose prideful ignorance and lack of sophistication has served to completely dismantled this country in every way, and leave us in military, economic, reputational, and moral ruin.

You would think that after seeing the ill they have wrought, they would step down and say “shit, I guess we don’t know what we’re talking about,” but no, they decide they still know what’s best for the country, and vote for someone like Palin cause she “seems like people” or whatever redneck nonsensical reason people give.

I don’t know you or what you stand for, you could be the dean of the london school of economics for all I know, but if you can seriously look at the current crises facing america, and think that the 40% chance that Palin has in becoming president in this first term is a risk you’re willing to take because she’s a “gamechanger” or some populist bullshit, then you’re a fool. You said that McCain is the SAFER choice, and that statement is a joke. Safer for what, keeping your guns or not paying any taxes while we return to the great depression? If you were a real libertarian, you have far more in common with Obama than with McCain.

These people who don’t even know what credit liquidity is have no basis even forming an opinion on the current economic situation, much less voting on it. Small government and personal liberty is a lovely mantra to have while Rome burns, but the fact is without government intervention, frozen credit will destroy all aspects of the market. See Kim’s new post, above.

If you are used to people lashing out at you for your political viewpoint, maybe that should tell you something.

Comment from Braden
Posted: September 30, 2008 at 3:25 pm

Anonymous:

“Hey Braden, First of all, whatever point your trying to make, it’s a lot easier for people to understand if you actually look over what you wrote before submitting your comment. A term doesn’t “come into pass”, it comes to pass. Also, the phrase is “so be it” not “so bet it” as you so eloquently put it. I still haven’t decided who I’m going to vote for, but I do know that I wouldn’t want to share opinions with someone who doesn’t have the knowledge to express their opinion in a readable manner. Lastly, Palin is actually very dumb, look it up, it’s a fact. If you were truly independent, your unbiased mind could see that.”

Easy there, drama queen. So I made a typo; I didn’t mean to offend you. I am sure everything you have ever typed in your lifetime has never contained a typo, right? Like for example, when you typed “your” instead of “you’re” in the very first sentence. I am sure it must be a typo, YOU’RE much too well educated to make such a mistake. Maybe you should look over what you write before you submit. Hey, I’m just saying.

Secondly, when I said “that Clinton woman,” I was referring to what Roberto said. Obviously, you misconstrued what I said.

And finally, you said, “Palin is actually very dumb, look it up, it’s a fact.”

Then share your infinite wisdom. You say she’s dumb? Prove me wrong and back up your claim. And don’t just sit there and tell me to “look it up” either. That’s your job. You’re obviously the more intelligent one here, so you show me.

That said Anonymous; I won’t entertain your response any further. It’s more than evident you’re nothing more than a sour individual who takes it upon himself/herself to personally attack those who go against your political ideologies.

Roberto:

I don’t even know where to begin after reading your response.

First you said, “Ahhh, the old paternalistic forum response approach, attempting to marginalize me as angry and irrational. Classic internet. Wonderful.”

Ok, Roberto. I’m game. How does what you said previously not fall under being hateful? After all, aren’t you part of a political movement who always accuses the “right wing” of being hateful? Like I said Roberto, “Pot Kettle Black.”

Secondly, are you willing to put our national security in the hands of someone who says this:

“I’m the only major candidate who opposed this war from the beginning and as president, I will end it. Second, I will cut tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending. I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems. I will not weaponize space. I will slow our development of future combat systems, and I will institute an independent defense priorities board to ensure that the quadrennial defense review is not used to justify unnecessary spending. Third, I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons. To seek that goal I will not develop new nuclear weapons, I will seek a global ban on the production of fissile material, and I will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBMs off hair trigger alert and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenals.”

Wow, Roberto! If your stance doesn’t represent naiveté, then I don’t know what does. I don’t know about you, Roberto, but with countries like Iran on the verge of a nuclear weapon, I can’t say I am comfortable with someone like Obama as President. Are you willing to trust a nuclear weapon to someone like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? So what you’re agreeing with Roberto is we should disarm ourselves while the rest of the world catches up to us, right?

Third, you said, “Hate and rage that the intellectuals and academics of our society, the people with the ACTUAL tools to run a government, have for 8 years been marginalized by a the naivete and ease of manipulation of a bunch of chest-thumping, paper-flag waving, ignorant gorillas in the middle states.”

Say what? “chest-thumping, paper-flag waving, ignorant gorillas in the middle states?” Would you care to clarify what you meant? Is this how you view your fellow Americans?

Fourth, you said, “but the fact is without government intervention, frozen credit will destroy all aspects of the market.” Roberto, do you even know who caused the current scenario we’re now in? I hate to inform you of this, but the Democrats are the root cause. It all started with Jimmy Carter. To put a long story short, the Democrats forced the lenders (a/k/a banks) to give out loans to people, even if those people couldn’t afford to make their mortgage payments. That right there my friend, can all be attributed to the Democrats, Roberto.

You really shouldn’t have, Roberto.

Let’s start off with who the top three recipients from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were from 1989 through 2008:

(1) Christopher Dodd, Democrat – $133,900
(2) John Kerry, Democrat – $111,000
(3) Barack Obama, Democrat – $105,849

And the kicker of it all? The three of them took that money willingly, even though they knew Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were failing.

Hard to believe, isn’t it Roberto?

It gets even better.

For many years the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of financial turmoil at a housing government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties. President Bush publicly called for GSE reform 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted.

Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded, as the President’s repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems.

The White House released this list of attempts by President Bush to reform Freddie Mae and Freddie Mac since he took office in 2001.
Unfortunately, Congress did not act on the president’s warnings:

2001

April: The Administration’s FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is “a potential problem,” because “financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity.”

2002

May: The President calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in his 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)

2003

January: Freddie Mac announces it has to restate financial results for the previous three years.

February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that “although investors perceive an implicit Federal guarantee of [GSE] obligations,” “the government has provided no explicit legal backing for them.” As a consequence, unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market. (“Systemic Risk: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Role of OFHEO,” OFHEO Report, 2/4/03)

September: Fannie Mae discloses SEC investigation and acknowledges OFHEO’s review found earnings manipulations.

September: Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact “legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises” and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.

October: Fannie Mae discloses $1.2 billion accounting error.

November: Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any “legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk.” To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have “broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards” and “receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE.” (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)

2004

February: The President’s FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital, and called for creation of a new, world-class regulator: “The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore…should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator.” (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)

February: CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to “not take [the financial market’s] strength for granted.” Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by “ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator.” (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, “Keeping Fannie And Freddie’s House In Order,” Financial Times, 2/24/04)

June: Deputy Secretary of Treasury Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and called for reform, saying “We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System.” (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)

2005

April: Treasury Secretary John Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying “Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America… Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system.” (Secretary John W. Snow, “Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee,” 4/13/05)

2007

July: Two Bear Stearns hedge funds invested in mortgage securities collapse.

August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying “first things first when it comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options.” (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, The White House, 8/9/07)

September: RealtyTrac announces foreclosure filings up 243,000 in August – up 115 percent from the year before.

September: Single-family existing home sales decreases 7.5 percent from the previous month – the lowest level in nine years. Median sale price of existing homes fell six percent from the year before.

December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying “These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I’ve called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon.” (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, The White House, 12/6/07)

2008

January: Bank of America announces it will buy Countrywide.

January: Citigroup announces mortgage portfolio lost $18.1 billion in value.

February: Assistant Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, says “A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully.” (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)

March: Bear Stearns announces it will sell itself to JPMorgan Chase.

March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and “move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages.” (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)

April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation and “modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes.” (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)

May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further.

“Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes. Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans.” (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08)

“[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their homes. And one way we can do that – and Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator.” (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)

“Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans.” (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)

June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying “we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.” (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)

July: Congress heeds the President’s call for action and passes reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.

In 2005– Senator John McCain partnered with three other Senate Republicans to reform the government’s involvement in lending.
Democrats blocked this reform, too.

All that said Roberto, you really need to get your facts straight before you point fingers as to where the blame goes.

If it were me, I wouldn’t be bailing anybody out. I’d let those financial institutions collapse and let the chips fall where they may; the free market will sort it all out on its own. We, the taxpayers should not be forced to foot the bill for this travesty caused by the Democrats.

I apologize for my lengthy comment, but I feel it was necessary. Especially given the comments presented by “Anonymous” and Roberto.

Sorry, Kim.

Comment from Roberto
Posted: September 30, 2008 at 4:26 pm

>If it were me, I wouldn’t be bailing anybody out. I’d let those financial institutions collapse and let the chips fall where they may; the free market will sort it all out on its own. We, the taxpayers should not be forced to foot the bill for this travesty caused by the Democrats.<

Haha, my goodness, that was a stunning display. And an appearance by Jimmy Carter no less!

So, to paraphrase: “Wall Street Bad! Main Street Good!”

oh….and then something about Carter forcing banks to lend to minorities, and ruining the world. I see you drink deep of the Fox Kool-aid.

Your last paragraph is so delightfully inane that it says everything about your intellect and understanding of the economy that needs to be said (I’m gonna scrap my guess about the London School of Econ). I couldn’t insult you with more poignancy than you do yourself.

I hope you have an sturdy umbrella son. These chips you cavalierly let fall are heavier and more numerous than you realize.

And now, I must go drink to the Apocalypse. Richly deserved, on both counts.

Comment from girlrobot
Posted: September 30, 2008 at 4:48 pm

Ok guys…it looks like you had your fun. I’m going to be closing this post now :)