Finally, Some Bailout for Homeowners

More than four months after the federal government claimed it was moving to address a mortgage crisis that threatened to take away the homes of millions of American families, steps are being taken to do just that.

All that was required was the exit of a president (George Bush) and a treasury secretary (Hank Paulson) who, in the best interpretation, were too economically inept to do what was needed, and, in the worst interpretation, used the crisis to steer hundreds of billions of dollars into the accounts of their buddies on Wall Street.

Whatever the cause of the delay, President Obama on Wednesday offered the response that was needed -- or, at the very least, a piece of the response that was needed.

The president proposes to take administrative actions to spend $75 billion of the Financial Stabilization Fund on facilitating modifications in existing loans and he wants to require lenders that are accepting tax dollars to adopt foreclosure prevention protocols to prevent unnecessary foreclosures. (The ultimate price-tag for this initiative could go as high as $275 billion, according to some estimates.)

These are meaningful steps.

Indeed, ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), the national organization that has been in the forefront of the struggle to keep working families in their homes -- and has taken a lot of hard hits in the media and Washington for doing so -- refers to Obama's move of Wednesday as "the first federal effort to fight foreclosures since the crisis that brought down the economy began two years ago."

The president's ambitious plan could help as many as nine million American families that are currently struggling to make mortgage payments or whose homes are now worth dramatically less than the amount they paid for them. The housing plan uses incentives to homeowners and lenders to ease and encourage the process by which home loans can be restructured or refinanced to avoid foreclosure.

"The plan I'm announcing focuses on rescuing families who have played by the rules and acted responsibly," says Obama, who added that the plan would do this "by refinancing loans for millions of families in traditional mortgages who are underwater or close to it; by modifying loans for families stuck in sub-prime mortgages they can't afford as a result of skyrocketing interest rates or personal misfortune; and by taking broader steps to keep mortgage rates low so that families can secure loans with affordable monthly payments."

That's the right sentiment, even if the precise strategy adopted by Obama tends to reward banks and bankers that acted irresponsibly. (More on savvier approaches in a moment.)

This is not a particularly new notion, however.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) chair Sheila Bair was promoting a plan to modify mortgages last fall.

Had the Bush White House and the Department of the Treasury listened to Bair -- and to members of Congress such as California Democrat Maxine Waters -- back then, hundreds of billions of dollars might have been saved. And the dollars that were spent might have actually gone to address the real crisis, as opposed to the demand from Wall Street for money to pay bonuses, bail out speculators and keep stockholders happy.

"In the end, all of us are paying a price for this home mortgage crisis. And all of us will pay an even steeper price if we allow this crisis to continue to deepen," Obama explained in Phoenix, where he announced his initiative. "But if we act boldly and swiftly to arrest this downward spiral, every American will benefit."

We should have acted "boldly and swiftly" -- and in a fiscally-responsible manner -- last fall. Hundreds of wasted billions later, we finally are. For that, Barack Obama and his administration deserve a good deal of credit -- just as George Bush and his administration deserve a great deal of blame.

The lesson is an important one.

Focus on the people who are hurting -- not the bankers who are threatening them -- first.

To do that, Ohio Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur and economist Dean Baker have some smart ideas. They argue that the proper role for the federal government is not to fund mortgage negotiations but to insist that banks -- many of which have already collected billions in taxpayer dollars -- carry them out.

Short of that step, ACORN head Bertha Lewis proposes a short-term ban on mortgage foreclosures during the period when the Obama administration is implementing its plan and seeking legislative approval for key components of it.

"With 8 to 9 million Americans on the verge of losing their homes in the next four years, the nation's housing crisis demands leadership commensurate with its enormous scale, and we got that today from the Obama Administration," says Lewis. "These effective sticks and carrots will do the job that the previous all-voluntary efforts have failed to do, and help prevent millions of unnecessary foreclosures once fully operational and enacted in law. Until that time, however, there should not be a single foreclosure on any family that could benefit from this comprehensive housing plan, so we need a thorough, binding moratorium."

Comments (136)

1. Now, now, Mr Nichols. We all know (according to our friends on the Right) that Hank Paulson was President AND Secretary of the Treasury and that George Dubya had nothing whatsoever to do with that filthy socialist bail-out stuff!

   Just like we know that it was all Barney Frank's (despite being in the minority at the time) and CRA loans (despite only 1 in 4 loan companies involved in CRA) that caused the housing crises.

   and just like we know it's "interfering with the free market and rightful compensation" to demand CEOs taking our tax money in bailouts to not make more than a half a million.

   and just like (coming up) we'll learn that helping families stay in homes they "obviously could never afford" (or can't now afford that they've been laid off) is welfare and the "end of capitalism!!!!"

   Posted by Mask at 02/18/2009 @ 1:39pm

2. Here's one problem right here...

   "The plan would seek to entice lenders into lowering rates, and would offer homeowners a chance to shave thousands of dollars off their mortgages." (NYT) ENTICE?

   The banks already got millions in order to to this ALREADY, and, in my area in Florida, the re-written mortgages are worse than the original ones, and thats the FEW that have actually been enticed to do so.

   After shelling out trillions to just about any corporation, an apparently unsustainable, predatory capitalistic system THIS IS ALL WE GET?

   ARE YOU SERIOUS?

   THIS IS BULL. This needs to be worked out between the government and the people in the form of cash payments. The banks WILL NOT DO ANYTHING VOLUNTARILY. And frankly, we'd all rather not deal with them anymore, they are predatory. Period.

   Thanks a lot Obama. This is how you really feel about the people that elected you? CRUMBS? How's this going to look with people squatting in their homes being forcibly ejected.

   Why can't you just do something honest across the board, to rich and poor alike, 3-4% mortgage rate or cash payment of several months mortgage. What's so bad about that? Simple and fair. You bailed out the criminals and screwed the honest people. AGAIN.

   Just like the bank bailout and the auto bailout. You can be sure, this is the first of MANY if we have anything to say about it. Obama you are really gullible or else you think of yourself in that "upper class" kind of way.

   Posted by tropical at 02/18/2009 @ 1:44pm

3. But what about the americans who actually read what they signed when they got a mortgage? What about the americans who lived within their means, sacrificed and met their expense committments? What about the americans who did the right think and aren't considered "victims"?

   You'll see us in 2010. Count on it.

   Posted by freiheit1 at 02/18/2009 @ 1:46pm

4. This is not fair to those citizens who lived frugal and only purchased homes that they could afford. Many irresponsible and foolish people did get loans for houses they could not afford, and these people should lose their houses in foreclosure, instead of being rewarded by the US government. The Federal Government might have pressured the Mortgage Markets to give mortgages to people with bad credit histories, but the responsible frugal taxpayers that did not live beyond their means should not be made to pay. Financial Managers combined multiple numbers of these low quality loans into packages (of low quality loans) and sold them to investors at (almost) face value. These Financial Managers got multi-million dollar (non-refundable) bonuses for their efforts. As more and more of these sub-prime non-credit worthy mortgagees defaulted, the value of these packages of multiple mortgages diminished drastically. The Taxpayer is now being asked to pay for these financial mistakes.

   In the overall picture, the US government will continue to buy a lots of paper and print up a bunch of new paper money, T-Bills, Bonds, and other similar paper securities then deposit these financial instruments into banks (actually the Federal Reserve) to cover checks issued to pay for irresponsible people's mortages (plus government payrolls, wars, pork barrel projects, negative balance of trade, failed business bailouts, entitlements, government grants, social schemes, new infrastructure, wealth re-distribution, mental health, imported consumer goods, police, education, make-work schemes, and etc.) and this will cause massive inflation to the point that it takes a whole day's wages to buy one loaf of bread.

   Posted by gerald4 at 02/18/2009 @ 1:54pm

5. "'The plan I'm announcing focuses on rescuing families who have played by the rules and acted responsibly,' says Obama"

   All evidence to the contrary, of course...

   Posted by usc1 at 02/18/2009 @ 2:02pm

6. True, with the ruination of the hsuB/cHeney unitary exec, in favor of a president, Obama and the 'congressional infrastructure' necessarily rebuilt, our government may once again actually become functional; addressing the essential needs of our nation and not the excessive ideological preferences of new con repub blood sucking ticks.

   It took time, but still what a big dif.

   And I do believe the public gets it:

   CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll. Feb. 7-8, 2009.

   "Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Democratic leaders in Congress are handling their job?"

   __Approve__Disapprove__Unsure

   ____60_______39_______2

   "Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Republican leaders in Congress are handling their job?"

   ____44_______55_______1

   &&&&&&&&&&&&&

   Pew Research Center Poll. Feb. 4-8, 2009. N=1,303 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.

   "Do you approve or disapprove of the job the Democratic leaders in Congress are doing?"

   __Approve__Disapprove__Unsure

   ____48_______38_______14

   "Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the job the Republican leaders in Congress are doing?"

   ____34_______51_______15

   *****

   We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union: 1. establish justice, 2. insure domestic tranquility, 3. provide for the common defense...

   Got to get that priority order correct....

   Posted by hsuBfools at 02/18/2009 @ 2:04pm

7. Oh come on, those of us with the skills to do well-- live within our means - or - are successful at whatever we do, just 'cus we are, whether it's luck or genes, whatever, doesn't matter--- we will always do well.

   Why punish those that aren't as well endowed? There are people with special needs. Why throw them to fend for themselves against the the new con repub blood sucking ticks !?!?!

   Of course the new con repub blood sucking ticks feed on the weak-- whether they're physically, mentally or spiritually weak, the new con repub blood sucking ticks want them and you to be suckered, because, as they've proven -- new con repub ticks suck.

   Don't fall for it.

   Posted by hsuBfools at 02/18/2009 @ 2:39pm

8. Posted by freiheit1 at 02/18/2009 @ 1:46pm

   Anyone who has purchased a home in the last 3-4 years, unless they put down 20% of the cost is likely upside down, even if they did they could still be upside down depending on the market their in. These are people who followed the rules, who pay their mortgages, knew what they were signing onto. But now because of no fault of their own owe more on their home than it is worth. If these people lose their job or have to move for work they are up a creek sans paddle, because they cannot sell their home, you can't close on a sale if you can't pay you debtor. Thus these folks end up being foreclosed on or short selling. Further dropping home values in their area and placing more folks in the same situation, a negative feedback loop. This proposal seeks to stem this feedback loop and will benefit everyone who owns a home, by stalling plumetting home values.

   Posted by Extraneous at 02/18/2009 @ 2:43pm

9. I find it confusing that we're being told banks are not lending. And that TARP was intended to free up credit.

   Interesting article in Twin Cities.com yesterday, where Bancorp CEO said ' TARP wasn't so much about freeing up credit. He claims bankers were TOLD to buy up troubled banks. But he also states they were told NOT to talk about this .

   It feels like we're being purposely mislead -- again.

   the story is here -- you decide --

   http://www.twincities.com/ci_11722986?source=most_viewed

   Posted by rannan3 at 02/18/2009 @ 2:45pm

10. While I understand that a percentage of the loans written where no doubt fraudulent, I am having a hard time with the whole idea of a bailout. When I bought my home, I figured out what I could pay first then I bought a house that fit within my "means".

    Many of my friends and co-workers bought houses much larger and more expense then me and are now in trouble or default. While I am sorry for their troubles, I was taught that everything has consequences and they gambled and lost - seems like in many cases all we are doing is bailing out bad behavior, why is that a good thing.

    I understand why I pay taxes, it is the social contract we all must accept to get the needed services that make everything work and that even though I do not avail myself of many of these services, it is the right thing that they are funded and available. But unlike healthcare, the military, roads, etc … I believe the government cannot & should not always be the fallback when a person makes bad life decisions.

    Posted by rloghry at 02/18/2009 @ 2:50pm

11. I was taught that everything has consequences and they gambled and lost - seems like in many cases all we are doing is bailing out bad behavior,

    why is that a good thing.

    Posted by rloghry at 02/18/2009 @ 2:50pm

    Because we judge ourselves by how well we treat the weakest amongst us.

    And new con repub blood sucking ticks judge themselves by how well they 'eat' the weakest amongst us.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/18/2009 @ 3:01pm

12. BTW, heard on NPR this morning of a case of a woman who was TRYING to renegotiate her loan with Countrywide...due to her husban being laid off and clearly informing them that they would NOT be able to make their February payment...back in November....and the loan company refused to discuss it.

    Oh, and she was told her ARM wouldn't go up in the first 5 years....and it went up in the first 5 MONTHS...

    but I guess she's one of those "no-accounts who couldn't live within their means", huh?

    Posted by Mask at 02/18/2009 @ 3:01pm

13. "Finally, Some Bailout for Homeowners"

    Horse Phong!

    Anyone beieving that this program is aimed at helping foreclosure candidates hasn't read economist, Michael Hudson's piece at Counterpoint yesterday. Here's the critical piece of analysis:

    "Take the much-vaunted $50 billion program designed to renegotiate mortgages downward for “troubled homeowners.” Upon closer examination it turns out that the real beneficiaries are the giant leading banks such as Citibank and Bank of America that have made the bad loans. The Treasury will take on the bad debt that banks are stuck with, and will permit mortgagees to renegotiate their monthly payment down to 38 per cent of their income. But rather than the banks taking the loss as they should do for over-lending, the Treasury itself will make up the difference – and pay it to the banks so that they will be able to get what they hoped to get. The hapless mortgage-burdened family stuck in their negative-equity home turns out to be merely a passive vehicle for the Treasury to pass debt relief on to the commercial banks."

    The homeowner an excuse for financial lobby stooge, Geithner, to find a way for the banks to pass off the consequences of their hijinx to the taxpayer! Perfect! We eat their bad debts and its packaged as social conscience. Sure.

    Posted by john lowell at 02/18/2009 @ 3:15pm

14. the "good" home owners stand to lose everything if or when the economy crashes and burns. just like the rich, who have a lot more to lose than you or I.

    what about those who rent, an apartment or a house? we got nothing before, we get nothing now. certainly not the subsidy the owners got and will continue to get, the interest tax deduction.

    how is this ownership society doing, Mr. Bush?

    Posted by emile duBois at 02/18/2009 @ 3:21pm

15. But what about the americans who actually read what they signed when they got a mortgage? What about the americans who lived within their means, sacrificed and met their expense committments? What about the americans who did the right think and aren't considered "victims"?

    You'll see us in 2010. Count on it.

    Posted by freiheit1 at 02/18/2009 @ 1:46pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    .

    For those under the delusion that the people being affected by the current situation were somehow irresponsible or stupid or greedy or whatever, here's a link to an all-to-common story...WWII vet, business man, civic leader...

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29198366/

    Posted by Lillian at 02/18/2009 @ 3:31pm

16. Rents have dropped right along with housing prices and rents no longer cover the mortgages. With so many people out of work, there also aren't as many rentors out there as there were. People are doubling up with family and friends.

    I've got 4 houses, 3 of which are rentals, all of which are interest only loans with no ARMs involved at all, and I'm upside down in all of them. One of my houses has sat empty for a year; another's renter was evicted owing 6 months rent (that's 18 months of uncovered mortgage payments). Yet still another of my renters moved out this month; I have one house out of 3 houses rented right now.

    Have been trying to sell one of the houses (owe 490k on it) for two years and the price has dropped from $549k to $349k. In that time, I had offers of $525k and $400k but they both fell through.

    I have been trying to negotiate loan modifications with the banks but am getting nowhere for a variety of reasons: they are swamped with modification requests, they are sitting on their cash and they are waiting to see what "the plan" is.

    Meanwhile, I am bled white. All of my savings are gone. Except for my primary residence, I am behind several mortgage payments on all my properties. I am threatened with foreclosure and once that happens I will declare bankruptcy.

    I can't sell my houses for what I owe and when I can find rentors the rent no longer covers the mortgage. This isn't really bad decision making on my part; this is a bad economy.

    Posted by Balrog at 02/18/2009 @ 3:34pm

17. And here's another link to another all-too-familiar story...about rampant predatory lending and the greed (and liack of personal responsibility) demonstrated by the banking industry...

    http://tinyurl.com/cps4bs

    Herb Sandler...World Savings...pocketed $2.5 Billion...

    ..."packaged loans"...predatory lender!

    Posted by Lillian at 02/18/2009 @ 3:37pm

18. Freiheit,

    I will answer your question.

    You get fucked over.

    Bushfools believes since you can take care of yourself then it is no biggie. But if you turn that around and suggest that others take care of themselves you become a neocon repub who is a blood sucking tick.... Even tho you are the one who's blood is being sucked away by others who are totally irresponsibile or useless.

    All I have to do is miss three mortgage payments and I am in great shape. Bushfools will take care of me cause I, too, am a victim. I have been a member of a working family and I am due my pay back now.

    But you and all those like you are fucked.... Again... And you get to pay the bills again. You are also stupid to scrimp, save, conserve, actualy read your contracts and are now dumb enough to work hard and earn high incomes when you are part of the problem.

    When do I get it check?

    Posted by YourJomamma at 02/18/2009 @ 3:38pm

19. "'The plan I'm announcing focuses on rescuing families who have played by the rules and acted responsibly,' says Obama"

    All evidence to the contrary, of course...

    Posted by usc1 at 02/18/2009 @ 2:02pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    .

    Paul Bishop, who worked at the nation's second largest savings and loan. World Savings Bank was among the industry's most admired mortgage lenders. But Bishop says the kind of lending practices he saw were leading to a world of trouble that would ultimately result in billions in losses and a federal investigation.

    What does Paul Bishop say he told executives at World Savings, three years before the crash?

    "We're breaking the law, okay? We're breaking the law. You know we're breaking the law. I know we're breaking the law. What the hell do you think is going on here? You know, you're granting too many people loans who simply can't qualify," Bishop told 60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley.

    Posted by Lillian at 02/18/2009 @ 3:44pm

20. In 2006, just before the housing crash, the Sandlers sold their bank to Wachovia and pocketed $2.3 billion.

    Trouble is, some of their money came from people like Betty Townes, who is financially ruined after being sold a series of World Savings mortgages she couldn't afford.

    Asked how many times she refinanced, Townes said, "Well we refinanced practically every year."

    World salesmen convinced Betty to refinance her mortgage four times in four years. She got about $20,000 each time. "Well, all I know that they told me this loan was best for me," she told Pelley.

    But how could it be best when Betty's pension couldn't qualify her for the loans?

    "They told me that they would go by my husband's payroll," she said.

    "Even though he'd been laid off from the shipyard?" Pelley asked.

    "No, he'd passed away," Townes replied.

    Her husband, Ronnie Townes, was dead. World Savings noted that in her papers. But his former income was used to qualify Betty.

    Betty Townes' actual income was about $1,875, but the income written on her loan application was over $4,000.

    Asked who did that, Brown told Pelley, "The interviewer that's listed is a staff person for World, for World Savings, according to the loan documents."

    "What does that tell you?" Pelley asked.

    "Looks like whoever typed up this document put in the number that they thought was the right number to get the loan approved," Brown said.

    "The term was 'packaged.' It had to be packaged correctly when it got to the underwriter," Bishop told Pelley.

    Bishop says a story like Betty's was common at his former office.

    Posted by Lillian at 02/18/2009 @ 3:53pm

21. If the bank was just going to turn around and sell the loan, do you think they cared whether or not it was...

    ...a "good" loan?

    Posted by Lillian at 02/18/2009 @ 3:54pm

22. and just like (coming up) we'll learn that helping families stay in homes they "obviously could never afford" (or can't now afford that they've been laid off) is welfare and the "end of capitalism!!!!"

    Posted by Mask at 02/18/2009 @ 1:39pm

    Mask,

    Based upon your posts for the past month or two, I would say you've become perhaps the greatest supporter of socialism on this website.

    Posted by antisocialist at 02/18/2009 @ 4:08pm

23. Bushfools believes since you can take care of yourself then it is no biggie. But if you turn that around and suggest that others take care of themselves you become a neocon repub who is a blood sucking tick....

    (No, one turns into a new con repub blood sucking tick when you prevent 'We the people' from being a safety net to 'We the people' in order to create more weak for the new con repub blood sucking ticks to suck on.)

    Even tho you are the one who's blood is being sucked away by others who are totally irresponsibile or useless.

    (No again, it's new con repub blood sucking ticks that do the sucking. Improving the weakest amongst us, lifts all boats or souls, even ticks, but they're unable to understand that concept.)

    All I have to do is miss three mortgage payments and I am in great shape. Bushfools will take care of me cause I, too, am a victim.

    (No again, it's 'We the people' taking care of its own.)

    I have been a member of a working family and I am due my pay back now.

    (So you've been working for free?)

    But you and all those like you are fucked.... Again...

    (I thought hsuB/cHeney lost?))

    And you get to pay the bills again. You are also stupid to scrimp, save, conserve, actualy read your contracts and are now dumb enough to work hard and earn high incomes when you are part of the problem.

    When do I get it check?

    (That's only the new con repub blood sucking tick infection talking. That's all. Pray some, open your heart. Keep working. Call me in the morning. You'll feel better. )

    Posted by YourJomamma at 02/18/2009 @ 3:38pm

    Besides, you are what you are, which is a good hard working person, because you are, not because others are not.... right?

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/18/2009 @ 4:11pm

24. er, ha, (I thought hsuB/cHeney 'were out'?)

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/18/2009 @ 4:17pm

25. Posted by YourJomamma at 02/18/2009 @ 3:38pm

    Of course you display that you know little to nothing about what is being put forward. This issue isn't about the people who were playing around above their means. This is for the people who read their contracts, scrimped and saved and tried to live within their means and got screwed over when the system collapsed through no fault of their own. Of course to you anyone who get screwed over, it is always their fault even if they had no power to stop what happened, except of course when an executive sinks a company then you will tell me what you told me before, that they can't control the markets.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/18/2009 @ 4:22pm

26. Riight bushfools.

    Nice try.... My post to Freiheit stands.

    Posted by YourJomamma at 02/18/2009 @ 4:23pm

27. "This is not fair to those citizens who lived frugal and only purchased homes that they could afford. "

    Posted by gerald4 at 02/18/2009 @ 1:54pm

    There are too many people who were told they had fixed rates on their mortgage's only to find it it was not so, or it was and had it switched with impunity by their lender, and in the end lost everything, for such a sentiment to be of more than academic, peripheral value, to me.

    So, one can attempt to reduce the number of stupid people in this country, or reduce the number of people who (a point which seemingly escapes most) played an even more idiotic (as it turns out) game of giving their brethren (birds of a feather flock together, no reason to find such a fine saying idiot proof, when all one must needs do is walk in the same direction ...) money.

    Posted by V at 02/18/2009 @ 4:23pm

28. But what about the americans who actually read what they signed when they got a mortgage? What about the americans who lived within their means, sacrificed and met their expense committments? What about the americans who did the right think and aren't considered "victims"?

    You'll see us in 2010. Count on it.

    Posted by freiheit1 at 02/18/2009 @ 1:46pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Obamanation and the undemocrats are calling us suckers and fools along with their Leftist enablers!

    Yep, small home, autos, etc. all paid for; no egotistical or elevated sense of entitlement to "have it all" or what everyone else has; plenty of secure savings at the lowest risk intrest earnings rates; and even no credit card or other debt!

    Now they tell us the we are responsible for and must rescue the fools, the greedy, the ignorant because we owe it to them socially! I do know a dark place where they can stick all this socially responsible entitlement crap!

    Now they are willing to mortgage away the future of children, grand, and even great grand children of the conservative for their social engineering leftist dreams! See you at the polls along with all the other formally inactivist voters!

    Posted by comancheamerican at 02/18/2009 @ 4:24pm

29. I can't sell my houses for what I owe and when I can find rentors the rent no longer covers the mortgage. This isn't really bad decision making on my part; this is a bad economy.

    Posted by Balrog at 02/18/2009 @ 3:34pm

    How did you get into real estate investing? Did you attend one of those "no money down" seminars?

    Not long ago, you couldn't turn on the TV without seeing somebody selling his "system" to get filthy stinking rich by buying a house one week and selling it for a $100,000 profit the next.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 02/18/2009 @ 4:25pm

30. For those under the delusion that the people being affected by the current situation were somehow irresponsible or stupid or greedy or whatever, here's a link to an all-to-common story...WWII vet, business man, civic leader...

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29198366/

    Posted by Lillian at 02/18/2009 @ 3:31pm

    Lillian, I don't believe for one minute that all people currently affected were irresponsible. But explain how the government will be able to distinguish, or if it will even try? Any chance this approximate $8k distribution per homeowner will be efficient or fair?

    Sorry, this isn't as it appears. As someone astutely stated above, the actions of our Congress and President are lighting the fuse of inflation.

    We all would be wise to stop judging our politicians by their good intentions and pay closer attention to their results.

    Whatever.

    Posted by freiheit1 at 02/18/2009 @ 4:25pm

31. Riight bushfools.

    Nice try.... My post to Freiheit stands.

    Posted by YourJomamma at 02/18/2009 @ 4:23pm

    Now they are willing to mortgage away the future of children, grand, and even great grand children of the conservative for their social engineering leftist dreams! See you at the polls along with all the other formally inactivist voters!

    Posted by comancheamerican at 02/18/2009 @ 4:24pm

    The new con repub blood sucking tick infection is rabid and delusional:

    "Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Democratic leaders in Congress are handling their job?"

    __Approve__Disapprove__Unsure

    ____60_______39_______2

    "Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Republican leaders in Congress are handling their job?"

    ____44_______55_______1

    ^^^^^^^^

    Gallup Poll. Rolling average. N=approx. 1,600 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.

    "Do you approve or disapprove of the way Barack Obama is handling his job as president?"

    __Approve___Disapprove

    ____62________25

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/18/2009 @ 4:32pm

32. Posted by antisocialist at 02/18/2009 @ 4:08pm

    Larry, except for the Interstates and NASA...

    EVERYTHING done domestically since 1932 in this country YOU consider "socialism".

    I haven't even decided on Lindsey Graham's (REPUBLICAN...from SOUTH CAROLINA) idea on nationalizing banks.

    So compared to a staunch Republican like him, I'm still fairly conservative...heheh

    Posted by Mask at 02/18/2009 @ 4:38pm

33. Try this question in your polls hsuBfools:

    Do you understand what the TARP actually did?

    Do you understand what the Stimulus Package really is?

    Do you understand the true function of the Federal Reserve?

    All your poll results show is the delusion of an electorate without the slightest idea of what is happening right before their eyes.

    And you want to make it a republican vs democrat issue.

    Neither party is to be trusted.

    Posted by freiheit1 at 02/18/2009 @ 4:39pm

34. Not long ago, you couldn't turn on the TV without seeing somebody selling his "system" to get filthy stinking rich by buying a house one week and selling it for a $100,000 profit the next. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 02/18/2009 @ 4:25pm

    You want to know a good way to get rich? Sell those guides on how to get rich. Hell you could just sell a book with white pages and on the last page it says "Gotcha!" people will still buy it.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/18/2009 @ 4:48pm

35. Hi Cc, Does that mean I wasted money buying the book. "Getting Rich Blogging on the Nation's Blog!"

    Dang!

    Posted by freiheit1 at 02/18/2009 @ 4:49pm

36. The plan also won't offer help to a homeowner who has lost his or her job and is unable to afford a new, lower monthly payment. Under the plan, lenders would take the loss on mortgage payments lowered to 38 percent of a borrower's income; the government would pay to subsidize a further reduction to 31 percent of income. But those with no income would not be eligible.

    The plan also includes some technical provisions to help untangle the legal morass created by the multitrillion-dollar wave of mortgage securitization at the height of the lending boom.

    Mortgage servicers have argued that even if they want to modify loans, they fear lawsuits from investors who would have to take less money. Getting those investors to agree on modified terms has been difficult.

    To help break that logjam, the Obama plan spells out uniform guidelines for modifying a loan and then protects lenders and servicers from lawsuits. The guidelines include a standard formula for estimating the value of a home in a falling market. Now, each lender and servicer uses its own formula, which offers another opportunity for investors to challenge proposed loan modifications.

    While the plan would require lenders accepting government "rescue" funds to use the guidelines, there are no requirements that they modify loans.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29260537/

    Some sound analysis of why the plan doesn't work as proposed

    http://tinyurl.com/bljh53

    And this analysis

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1039192509&play=1

    Posted by antisocialist at 02/18/2009 @ 4:58pm

37. Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/18/2009 @ 4:48pm

    I liked the SNL "commercial" for people in debt...this was before the crisis...the faux celebrity was selliing a 2 page pamphlet titled "Stop buying stuff you can't afford" which could be yours for just six easy payments of $29.95/month.

    Posted by usc1 at 02/18/2009 @ 5:00pm

38. Posted by YourJomamma at 02/18/2009 @ 4:23pm

    For some reason I get a picture of Bushfools as the kind of guy that would give everystudent in the class an "A" just for effort...doesn't matter if they actually got the answer right, only that they tried their best...can't let anyone suffer, fail, or God forbid learn from their mistakes...

    cheapens what everyone else does...

    Posted by usc1 at 02/18/2009 @ 5:06pm

39. But if you turn that around and suggest that others take care of themselves you become a neocon repub who is a blood sucking tick.... Even tho you are the one who's blood is being sucked away by others who are totally irresponsibile or useless.

    Posted by YourJomamma at 02/18/2009 @ 3:38pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    .

    Well John, rather than listen to your ranting neocon fantasy, let's actually take a close look at an example of those "others who are totally irresponsible or useless", shall we...

    .

    Ray Vargas,84, of CERRITOS, Calif, is a deeply religious man who believes God is guiding him in a mission to expose wrongful foreclosure. Got his first job at 8 in the depths of the Great Depression. As a Navy corpsman during World War II, he went ashore with the third assault wave at Utah Beach on D-Day to pluck his fallen buddies from the sand and patch them up as best he could. Later, he owned a painting business and took on big jobs, like the restoration of the Queen Mary, the steamship turned hotel, in nearby Long Beach.

    Vargas' business flourished and he became a well-known civic leader, serving seven times as commander of the local VFW.

    Documents show that loans sold to Vargas by mortgage brokers on behalf of the lenders were loaded with features that federal officials say are the hallmarks of predatory lending.

    Lenders passed around the deed to Vargas' house as if it were a whiskey bottle at a frat party.

    To tap his $531,445 in equity, Vargas paid at least $123,237 in loan origination fees and prepayment penalties.

    .

    Yep, worked since he was 8, WWII hero, civic-minded, successful, business owner, commander of the local VFW...

    ...he sure sounds "totally irresponsible and useless", right John?

    Posted by Lillian at 02/18/2009 @ 5:40pm

40. Posted by comancheamerican at 02/18/2009 @ 4:24pm

    So a better course of action would be? Do nothing? Let house prices continue to fall, let foreclosures continue, let the economy continue to spiral downward until it hits rock bottom?

    The republicans on this site remind me of the guy who watches an old lady get mugged and pretends they did not see it, because its not their problem, and besides that lady should have known better than to be out after dark, so its her fault anyways.

    Posted by Extraneous at 02/18/2009 @ 5:45pm

41. Did stories about people whose lives were saved by the US invasion of Iraq justify the mission for you Lillian in the same way you justify the Stimulus with this example?

    No one here is suggesting that there are not examples of people who were screwed.

    Seems to me you think the people who caused it are the same people who can fix it.

    Enjoy your bigger government.

    Posted by freiheit1 at 02/18/2009 @ 5:46pm

42. Extra,

    I often wonder what republicans are even doing here on this site! Let them go spew their bilge on National Review or something.

    Posted by FDR43 at 02/18/2009 @ 5:46pm

43. Posted by Extraneous at 02/18/2009 @ 5:45pm

    No, by all means, keep feeding the addict even more heroin. That is so much easier than breaking the addiction. And apparently to you, better for the addict in the long run?

    How sad you don't even see how exploited we all are. Or maybe you believe loss should be socialized... for the common good?

    Nut.

    Posted by freiheit1 at 02/18/2009 @ 5:51pm

44. There's that word again: "socialist."

    Hands down, the most abused word in the English language.

    Posted by FDR43 at 02/18/2009 @ 5:55pm

45. I've got 4 houses, 3 of which are rentals, all of which are interest only loans with no ARMs involved at all, and I'm upside down in all of them....

    Have been trying to sell one of the houses (owe 490k on it) for two years...the rent no longer covers the mortgage. This isn't really bad decision making on my part; this is a bad economy.

    Posted by Balrog at 02/18/2009 @ 3:34pm

    Sorry to hear your situation is both bigger in scale and of course, much worse than the last time you mentioned this.

    At that time, you mentioned only 2 houses, one you live in...and you were down, I think $80k over the many months of housing decline. I made a empathy comment that......don't feel bad, I lost $80k a whole lot faster. Obviously, we are both even worse off than then.

    Still, I'm curious if you can share your location? California, Vegas, Seattle?????? I am looking to buy when the dust settles more. Vegas is my main target...expecting lots of blood on the street!

    Your "decision" was highly questionable.....buying high to sell higher is extremely dangerous!

    Posted by Happy at 02/18/2009 @ 5:57pm

46. ...doesn't matter if they actually got the answer right, only that they tried their best...can't let anyone suffer, fail, or God forbid learn from their mistakes... cheapens what everyone else does...

    Posted by usc1 at 02/18/2009 @ 5:06pm

    No, I actually give a fair amount of F's, D's, etc. to deserving students, but I also refer these students in need to the counseling and mental health services, financial aid and/or career services on campus.

    So you new con repub blood sucking ticks can't have your way with them.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/18/2009 @ 5:58pm

47. To tap his $531,445 in equity, Vargas paid at least $123,237 in loan origination fees and prepayment penalties.

    .

    Yep, worked since he was 8, WWII hero, civic-minded, successful, business owner, commander of the local VFW...

    ...he sure sounds "totally irresponsible and useless", right John?

    Posted by Lillian at 02/18/2009 @ 5:40pm

    yes, he does sound either irresponsible or mentally incapable of handling his own affairs. No person in their right mind would ever sign a loan that showed those kinds of figures on the HUD statement.

    Posted by antisocialist at 02/18/2009 @ 6:03pm

48. I liked the SNL "commercial" for people in debt...this was before the crisis...the faux celebrity was selliing a 2 page pamphlet titled "Stop buying stuff you can't afford" which could be yours for just six easy payments of $29.95/month. Posted by usc1 at 02/18/2009 @ 5:00pm

    Haha. A book like that would leap off the shelves.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/18/2009 @ 6:06pm

49. At that time, you mentioned only 2 houses, one you live in...and you were down, I think $80k over the many months of housing decline. I made a empathy comment that......don't feel bad, I lost $80k a whole lot faster. Obviously, we are both even worse off than then.

    Posted by Happy at 02/18/2009 @ 5:57pm

    Those two houses were only part of the equation at the time. To complete the picture, I also have a bare lot for sale at less than half of what I paid for it. When I bought it, it was the cheapest lot in town.

    And no, I didn't go to a no-money-down seminar. These real estate investments were the result of many conversations with our financial advisors at Smith-Barney, along with our many friends who are bankers, mortgage officers, real estate agents, etc...none of whom stood to gain by any of our transactions.

    Where do you invest your money? In real estate or the stock market. We got into real estate to spread the risk. Didn't figure on both tanking.

    Ah, well...I still have a good job, which is more than a lot of people can say.

    Posted by Balrog at 02/18/2009 @ 6:16pm

50. All your poll results show is the delusion of an electorate without the slightest idea of what is happening right before their eyes.

    Posted by freiheit1 at 02/18/2009 @ 4:39pm

    So are you're saying that you too are delusional -or- you didn't vote, but aren't apathetic enough not to whine about not being part of the electorate...?

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/18/2009 @ 6:17pm

51. Posted by Happy at 02/18/2009 @ 5:57pm

    Is Vegas still booming? I know it grew massively since I was a kid but I didn't know if it was still experiencing that kind of growth.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/18/2009 @ 6:18pm

52. Is Vegas still booming? Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/18/2009 @ 6:18pm

    From a Feb 12th Bloomberg article:

    The housing market lost an estimated $3.3 trillion in value last year and almost one in six owners owed more than their homes were worth.

    Nevada had the highest foreclosure rate of any state as one in 76 housing units received a filing in January. Filings jumped 137 percent from a year earlier to 14,444.

    Las Vegas-Paradise, Nevada, had the second-highest rate at one in 63 housing units, and Reno-Sparks, Nevada ranked 10th.

    Posted by Balrog at 02/18/2009 @ 6:26pm

53. Why is it always the Republicans (I am not one BTW) such a easy target. Bush this, Cheany that, what about members of my own party that championed many of the policies on banking deregulation ... paging Maxine Waters, Charles Rangel, Barney Frank.

    And for every true story of fraud, there is one of simple greed. You cannot tell that everyone who bought a house in the last 5 years was not smart enough to know that a monthly payment that was less than the interest earned on the loan, did not know that they were at risk if the market changed.

    Can we please figure away to help those in need (I support that) and not those who made a calculated (bad) decision and now we are going to bail them out. And please do not accuse me of being a neocon or a thoughtless SOB, I have lost my job before it is devastating and the effects ripple through family and friends , but we cannot help everyone least of all those who simply took advantage of a situation that has now turned against them.

    Posted by rloghry at 02/18/2009 @ 6:34pm

54. Dow____+3.03 ___7,555.63

    Hey, it's a start...

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/18/2009 @ 6:34pm

55. Ah, back to the future:

    Sell-Off Pushes Index Below 7,600 And Wipes Out All Gains for 1998

    By Mitchell Martin

    Published: TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 1, 1998

    http://www.iht.com/articles/1998/09/01/mart.t.php

    So would the current headline be:

    Sell-Off Pushes Index Below 7,600 And Wipes Out All Gains Since 2001

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/18/2009 @ 6:40pm

56. Kinda like the last 8 years never happened.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/18/2009 @ 6:44pm

57. Where do you invest your money?...

    Ah, well...I still have a good job, which is more than a lot of people can say.

    Posted by Balrog at 02/18/2009 @ 6:16pm

    I started my investing career w/$20k back in `86....parlayed that into 6 rental properties with the S&Ls taking back paper (100% financing) while my equity went into rehabbing. I owned as many as 14~15 properties at my peak and slowly sold about half of them off and converted some proceeds into financial investments....and my older son's college.

    The Clinton Boom was great for me and I cashed out a large chunk, almost ALL Tech....before the Spring 2000 Nasdaq peak.

    In the past 10~12 years, I try to keep a balance where my networth is more or less balanced between RE & Financials.....and I was a little too greedy when I allowed the Financials to go too high. I also watch my leverage ratio on the RE side.....Never bought bonds in my life! Aggressively Conservative...but I think bonds are in my future!

    Our country is in for some really hard time...any rebounds will be short-lived. BTW, also own a couple of lots with my custom builder's signs on it.

    You still didn't say where you are...guess that's cool....Google surely knows....:)

    Posted by Happy at 02/18/2009 @ 6:45pm

58. yes, he does sound either irresponsible or mentally incapable of handling his own affairs. No person in their right mind would ever sign a loan that showed those kinds of figures on the HUD statement.

    Posted by antisocialist at 02/18/2009 @ 6:03pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    .

    Sign "a" loan with those numbers, Larry? You didn't even bother to read the man's actual story at the link, did you?

    You're willing to pass judgement on him - just because his story runs counter to the neocon blather. How very...

    ...predictable.

    Posted by Lillian at 02/18/2009 @ 6:45pm

59. "The republicans on this site"

    So a better course of action would be? Do nothing? Let house prices continue to fall, let foreclosures continue, let the economy continue to spiral downward until it hits rock bottom?

    Posted by Extraneous at 02/18/2009 @ 5:45pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Wrong on the Republican part, but yes I do believe that everyone has a "duty" to exhibit personal responsibility and accountability for themselves and their family! That extends to fiscal conservation of their assets as well as being morally conservative and their lives should reflect that! To bad public education does not teach that anymore.

    Social responsibility arises from morality but is limited to any excess of private resourses, not giving at the "expense" of the welfare of you and your family. If you can provide food, clothing, and if possible shelter for others you should as a moral duty. Unlike the majority of Undemocrats and leftist most conservatives DO give and at times sacrificially if needed!

    However, Obamanation and the Undemocrats are out to "punish" those who have acted resoponsibly with their resouses reguardless of whether or NOT yours are limited and with NO reguard to the generational THEFT that their programs entail! Just because some have been stupid or acted stupid with their personal resourses does not give them some sort of "entitlement" to take others! That is called THEFT!

    The socialistic fascists that comprise the "regressives" of leftist sites are living a "robin hood" fantasy that does not exist! They can NEVER really punish the truely rich, only those who have labored long and hard to secure some guarrentee of a future for their families. And now the leftist wish to ROB them and the future children of America!

    Posted by comancheamerican at 02/18/2009 @ 6:53pm

60. Can we please figure away to help those in need (I support that) and not those who made a calculated (bad) decision and now we are going to bail them out.

    Posted by rloghry at 02/18/2009 @ 6:34pm

    Look we try to rehabilitate criminals, (maybe not very well), but they made bad choices too. Why not educate those that made bad home contract decisions in order for them not to make them again? Isn't that better for our society?

    Maybe not for a better new con repub blood sucking ticks advantage, but we're talking higher level of reasoned direction; utilizing a slightly bigger soul than a molecule from a tick excretion.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/18/2009 @ 6:54pm

61. Let's hope the next 95 months of Obama's presidency aren't as hectic as the first month.

    Posted by Irmanator at 02/18/2009 @ 6:55pm

62. However, Obamanation and the Undemocrats are out to "punish" those who have acted resoponsibly with their resouses reguardless of whether or NOT yours are limited and with NO reguard to the generational THEFT that their programs entail! Just because some have been stupid or acted stupid with their personal resourses does not give them some sort of "entitlement" to take others! That is called THEFT!

    The socialistic fascists that comprise the "regressives" of leftist sites are living a "robin hood" fantasy that does not exist! They can NEVER really punish the truely rich, only those who have labored long and hard to secure some guarrentee of a future for their families. And now the leftist wish to ROB them and the future children of America!

    Posted by comancheamerican at 02/18/2009 @ 6:53pm

    Ok, it takes money to build schools, hospitals, train doctors, teachers, build roads, etc.; always to benefit future generations.

    Ok, so how dense are new con repub blood sucking ticks, really?

    DOH!

    I hear it's because all the blood pools in their lower extremity. Well ok, all their sucking does do a little brain damage, considering the size of the new con repub blood sucking tick...

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/18/2009 @ 7:09pm

63. Posted by hsuBfools at 02/18/2009 @ 7:09pm

    Have you done any math on President Barack Obama's $75 billion plan to help up to 9 million families restructure or refinance their mortgages to avoid losing their homes to foreclosure?

    Or are you just enthralled with the compassion of it all?

    Do the math, hsuBfools, so you can get an idea of what the politicians think your vote is worth.

    Posted by freiheit1 at 02/18/2009 @ 7:43pm

64. A cartoon likening the author of the stimulus bill, perhaps President Barack Obama, with a rabid chimpanzee graced the pages of the New York Post on Wednesday.

    The drawing, from famed cartoonist Sean Delonas, is rife with violent imagery and racial undertones. In it, two befuddled-looking police officers holding guns look over the dead and bleeding chimpanzee that attacked a woman in Stamford, Connecticut.

    "They'll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill," reads the caption.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/18/ new-york-post-chimp-carto_n_167841.html

    Posted by FDR43 at 02/18/2009 @ 7:46pm

65. comancheamerican - "The socialistic fascists that comprise the "regressives" of leftist sites are living a "robin hood" fantasy that does not exist! "

    Nice turn of a phase - but if you'll do some reseach you'll quickly discover that you are either a socialist or a facist they really cannot co-exist.

    hsuBfools - "Maybe not for a better new con repub blood sucking ticks advantage, but we're talking higher level of reasoned direction; utilizing a slightly bigger soul than a molecule from a tick excretion"

    I consider myself a reasoned person of many points of view and the fact that I believe that some people must not be bailed out makes me a bug that sucks the blood of others is very distubing.

    "If you haven't the strength to impose your own terms upon life, you must accept the terms it offers you" -T.S. Eliot

    Posted by rloghry at 02/18/2009 @ 7:51pm

66. Nice turn of a phase - but if you'll do some reseach you'll quickly discover that you are either a socialist or a facist they really cannot co-exist.

    Posted by rloghry at 02/18/2009 @ 7:51pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    "Scratch a liberal and you'll find a fascist" Same animal just a wolf in sheeps clothing!

    "If you haven't the strength to impose your own terms upon life, you must accept the terms it offers you" -T.S. Eliot

    Posted by rloghry at 02/18/2009 @ 7:51pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Remind us of that when the Republicans try to undo all the harm that Obamanation and the Undemocrats are doing to the nation!

    Posted by comancheamerican at 02/18/2009 @ 8:03pm

67. "The socialistic fascists that comprise the "regressives" of leftist sites are living a "robin hood" fantasy that does not exist! "

    Conservatives would actually be the Fascists, try researching what end of the political spectrum fascism falls on.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/18/2009 @ 8:06pm

68. Conservatives would actually be the Fascists, try researching what end of the political spectrum fascism falls on.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/18/2009 @ 8:06pm

    He's just spouting big words he heard grownups using on the radio...

    Posted by Balrog at 02/18/2009 @ 8:08pm

69. "Scratch a liberal and you'll find a fascist"

    Posted by comancheamerican at 02/18/2009 @ 8:03pm

    What you seem to be completely unable to realize about that quote is that he is basically saying that if you scratch a liberal politician is that they are all right-wingers in disguise. Basically if you scratch a democrat they are all Christian right in the end.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/18/2009 @ 8:10pm

70. On top of that, that quote was about political correctness and censorship. Not a statement about liberals in general. Of course it's not uncommon for you to take those things out of context.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/18/2009 @ 8:12pm

71. He's just spouting big words he heard grownups using on the radio... Posted by Balrog at 02/18/2009 @ 8:08pm

    It's sad. There's so many decent people to converse with on here and then there are a large majority who lob insults like children. Gets tiring.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/18/2009 @ 8:13pm

72. However, Obamanation and the Undemocrats are out to "punish" those who have acted resoponsibly with their resouses reguardless of whether or NOT yours are limited

    Posted by comancheamerican at 02/18/2009 @ 6:53pm

    Its not theft, as far as I am concerned it is preventing theft. If we can stem the tide of foreclosures, it benefits all home owners. Why should I lose thousands, so far my home has dropped close to 40K due to the housing crash, why should I be punished for the greed of others? If we look at the numbers Obama is suggesting 75b for this program, the US population is just over 300m lets be conservative and say half of those are tax paying adults, that means the progam at face value costs each of us $500.00 if that can stop my home value from dropping even another $1k that is a win for me. $500 is ~1% of the loss I have already taken. Heck, if I was told that paying $500 dollars right now would have a 50% chance of stabilizing my home price I would be more than happy to sign on.

    What Obama's trying to do is not "punish" those who have acted responsibly, but to protect us. If you want someone to blame for ROBBING YOU, I suggest you look at the folks to told the stupid irresponsible people that they qualified for loans the obvioulsy could not afford.

    Posted by Extraneous at 02/18/2009 @ 8:13pm

73. Sign "a" loan with those numbers, Larry? You didn't even bother to read the man's actual story at the link, did you?

    You're willing to pass judgement on him - just because his story runs counter to the neocon blather. How very...

    ...predictable.

    Posted by Lillian at 02/18/2009 @ 6:45pm

    That would be good Lillian if you had bothered to provide the link. If you do I will read and adjust my comments if it justifies it.

    Posted by antisocialist at 02/18/2009 @ 8:14pm

74. Have you done any math on President Barack Obama's $75 billion plan to help up to 9 million families

    Posted by freiheit1 at 02/18/2009 @ 7:43pm

    Without stating which variables?

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/18/2009 @ 8:41pm

75. I consider myself a reasoned person of many points of view and the fact that I believe that some people must not be bailed out makes me a bug that sucks the blood of others is very distubing.

    Posted by rloghry at 02/18/2009 @ 7:51p

    Why do you want to punish people that are already being punished? Do you believe in torture too?

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/18/2009 @ 8:46pm

76. Maddow has another neat graphic. Seems the lock step new con repub blood sucking ticks have doubled the number ever for filibustering last year. Never have so few do-nothing misguided ticks obstructed so many.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/18/2009 @ 9:21pm

77. Fascism is a merger of a unitary exec and corporate interests... essentially eliminating the 'We the people' part of government. Uhmmm - sounds familiar...

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/18/2009 @ 9:30pm

78. Why do you want to punish people that are already being punished? Do you believe in torture too? Posted by hsuBfools at 02/18/2009 @ 8:46pm

    Bailing the people who did this to themselves out would be freeing them from punishment. While I agree we should help the people who through no fault of their own ended up in this situation we should not help those who are entirely at fault for their problems.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/18/2009 @ 9:34pm

79. Bailing the people who did this to themselves out would be freeing them from punishment. While I agree we should help the people who through no fault of their own ended up in this situation we should not help those who are entirely at fault for their problems.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/18/2009 @ 9:34pm

    OK, there are actually people that knowingly bought a house in order to be purposely foreclosed on knowing ahead of time there was going to be a bail out, or there are people refusing to pay the mortgage but have the money to pay, or bought several houses to sell at a profit and lost their shirt, or or what? What is the situation(s) that is "did this to themselves", what does "are entirely at fault for their problems" mean-- explain what that is exactly? These situations sound rather vacuous.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/18/2009 @ 9:57pm

80. Kinda like the last 8 years never happened.----Posted by hsuBfools at 02/18/2009 @ 6:44pm

    You just discovered what Limbaugh and Hnnity are trying to convince the ditto-heads and "Hannitized".

    LOL

    Posted by Mask at 02/18/2009 @ 10:06pm

81. hSuBfOoLs-

    Did you set up a macro for "new con repub blood sucking ticks", or do you have to type it out every time?

    Posted by twillie at 02/18/2009 @ 10:36pm

82. No, I actually give a fair amount of F's, D's, etc. to deserving students, but I also refer these students in need to the counseling and mental health services, financial aid and/or career services on campus.

    So you new con repub blood sucking ticks can't have your way with them.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/18/2009 @ 5:58pm

    Oh come on, those of us with the skills to do well-- make good grades - or - are successful at whatever we do, just 'cus we are, whether it's luck or genes, whatever, doesn't matter--- we will always do well.

    Why punish those that aren't as well endowed? There are people with special needs. Why throw them to fend for themselves against the bastard life sucking teachers !?!?!

    Of course the new bastard life sucking teachers feed on the weak-- whether they're physically, mentally or spiritually weak, the new bastard life sucking teachers want them and you to be suckered, because, as they've proven -- new bastard life sucking teachers suck.

    Don't fall for it.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/18/2009 @ 2:39pm

    Posted by usc1 at 02/18/2009 @ 10:53pm

83. "Remind us of that when the Republicans try to undo all the harm that Obamanation and the Undemocrats are doing to the nation!"

    Posted by comancheamerican 02/18/2009 @ 8:03pm

    well, i guess the republican governors are "considering" the option of rejecting the funding for their respective states.

    of course, if they did reject funding, then they would probably get eaten alive by the people.

    so in essence, these particular republicans are just total hypocrites. that is the essence of hypocrisy, right there.

    and by taking the money, they are essentially validating the entire premise of the bail out!

    how is that for the warped mentality running the GOP at this hour?

    Posted by darladoon at 02/18/2009 @ 11:00pm

84. What about the americans who lived within their means, sacrificed and met their expense committments?

    Posted by freiheit1 at 02/18/2009 @ 1:46pm

    i don't think there are many left......

    "In America, private-sector debt soared from $22 trillion in 2000 (or the equivalent of 222% of GDP) to $41 trillion (294% of GDP) in 2007"

    Posted by frosty zoom at 02/18/2009 @ 11:41pm

85. .....by taking the money, they are essentially validating the entire premise of the bail out!

    Posted by darladoon at 02/18/2009 @ 11:00pm

    To some people, maybe....but to most, like me, total NONsense!

    In fact, if what I read about the house purchase tax credit ($8k) for first time buyers is true, I intend to help my 23-yrs old buy one even if he's headed off to med school out-of-town by this fall.

    I'd do the same for my 18-yrs old except his $300 per month part-time income might be a problem.....I'll need to brainstorm some more and learn more about the new HOPE AND CHANGE "system"...maybe Octomom can be my Dear Abbey:::~~~)))

    Posted by Happy at 02/18/2009 @ 11:46pm

86. I would say you've become perhaps the greatest supporter of socialism on this website.

    Posted by antisocialist at 02/18/2009 @ 4:08pm

    mask is ¡¡¡¡¡¿¿¿¿¿alan greenspan?????!!!!!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 02/18/2009 @ 11:52pm

87. Greenspan backs bank nationalisation

    By Krishna Guha and Edward Luce in Washington

    Published: February 18 2009 00:06 | Last updated: February 18 2009 00:06

    The US government may have to nationalise some banks on a temporary basis to fix the financial system and restore the flow of credit, Alan Greenspan, the former Federal Reserve chairman, has told the Financial Times.

    In an interview, Mr Greenspan, who for decades was regarded as the high priest of laisser-faire capitalism, said nationalisation could be the least bad option left for policymakers.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 02/18/2009 @ 11:52pm

88. las vegas is a very stupid place for a city.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 02/18/2009 @ 11:58pm

89. karma be damned*!

    i'm gonna say it:

    "told you so......."

    *just kidding

    Posted by frosty zoom at 02/18/2009 @ 11:59pm

90. Enjoy your bigger government. Posted by freiheit1 at 02/18/2009 @ 5:46pm

    it's sooooooo reaganesque.......

    Posted by frosty zoom at 02/19/2009 @ 12:02am

91. Kinda like the last 8 years never happened. Posted by hsuBfools at 02/18/2009 @ 6:44pm

    ever read timequake?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timequake

    Posted by frosty zoom at 02/19/2009 @ 12:04am

92. This is not fair to those citizens who lived frugal and only purchased homes that they could afford.

    Posted by gerald4

    Fair has nothing to do with it. The US cannot let the banks fail, so the taxpayers are on the hook for the bad loans.

    This plan is attempting to prevent further foreclosures by lowering mortgage payments with banks remaining whole and Fed assuming the difference. It still sucks, but at least some of the loan is being paid or taxpayers would be responsible for all of it.

    Massive foreclosures are creating blighted areas that are dragging down all nearby property values causing more defaults.

    I don't think it would be a bad idea to provide the taxpayers an interest in the properties, so if they're sold at higher than the dismal present rates, the Govt is paid back.

    Posted by koroviev at 02/19/2009 @ 12:12am

93. "To some people, maybe....but to most, like me, total NONsense!"

    to not accept federal funds would be to argue that doing so would cost the taxpayer money. and the republicans are now the populist guardians of the overburdened taxpayer.

    conversely, by accepting the funds, these governors are contradicting that argument. plain and simple.

    Posted by darladoon at 02/19/2009 @ 12:22am

94. Of course the new bastard life sucking teachers feed on the weak-- whether they're physically, mentally or spiritually weak, the new bastard life sucking teachers want them and you to be suckered, because, as they've proven -- new bastard life sucking teachers suck.

    Posted by usc1 at 02/18/2009 @ 10:53pm

    BWAHAHahahahahah

    Looks like usc1 had a bad experience with a stern teacher. That apparently didn't refer him to mental health counseling. (Did we ever have services for ticks with disabilities accommodations? one would think that would be what they'd be whining about.)

    But a good example-- new con repub blood sucking ticks can't reason symmetrically-- this tick equates getting a mere grade with losing a house! Oh an 'F' equals being lied into a war perhaps? Maybe a 'D' equals outing a covert agent?

    Yep, delusional. Well to us. To other ticks, apparently it makes perfect sense!

    Kinda like the new con repub house blood sucking ticks all of a sudden see themselves as the 300 Spartans against 'We the people's rebuilding programs a la sprayed on abs covering their mushy engorged sacks they attempt to think with.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/19/2009 @ 12:37am

95. and finally,

    "record lows" are at record highs.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 02/19/2009 @ 12:38am

96. Posted by frosty zoom at 02/19/2009 @ 12:04am

    Obama to new con repub blood sucking ticks - -

    "You were sick, now you're better, there's work to be done".

    Oh well, it was a try...

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/19/2009 @ 12:42am

97. That would be good Lillian if you had bothered to provide the link. If you do I will read and adjust my comments if it justifies it.

    Posted by antisocialist at 02/18/2009 @ 8:14pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    .

    Really Larry? Because I DID post it...5 hours prior. You just never bothered to read it...

    ...before passing juedgement on it.

    .

    For those under the delusion that the people being affected by the current situation were somehow irresponsible or stupid or greedy or whatever, here's a link to an all-to-common story...WWII vet, business man, civic leader...

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29198366/

    Posted by Lillian at 02/18/2009 @ 3:31pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Posted by Lillian at 02/19/2009 @ 12:52am

98. New con repub blood sucking ticks!

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/19/2009 @ 12:56am

99. This bill doesn't help me one bit and I own 4 houses, and I am biulding a new one. I hope I can get the sweetheart deals obama is giving out. Wait I am not a poor minority. I have achieved without a hand out a pell grant or any government assistance. My union parents are ashamed at this mess and the massive handouts to the lazy.

    Posted by apoorspic at 02/19/2009 @ 01:04am

100. Posted by apoorspic at 02/19/2009 @ 01:04am

     From what I read, you get nothing. You seem stimulated enough. However, your opinion is in the 'minority' and you have a 'poor' attitude for those less fortunate than yourself. My you never be called lazy while actually being injured in some unfortunate way.

     CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll. Feb. 7-8, 2009.

     "Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Democratic leaders in Congress are handling their job?"

     __Approve__Disapprove__Unsure

     ____60_______39_______2

     "Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Republican leaders in Congress are handling their job?"

     ____44_______55_______1

     ^^^^^^^^

     Gallup Poll. Rolling average. N=approx. 1,600 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.

     "Do you approve or disapprove of the way Barack Obama is handling his job as president?"

     __Approve___Disapprove

     ____62________25

     Posted by hsuBfools at 02/19/2009 @ 01:33am

101. er, May you never be called lazy ...

     Posted by hsuBfools at 02/19/2009 @ 01:35am

102. http://www.pollingreport.com/budget.htm

     Posted by hsuBfools at 02/19/2009 @ 01:43am

103. Posted by hsuBfools at 02/19/2009 @ 12:37am

     WHOOOOOOOSH!

     That would be the sound of Bushfools missing the point...not unexpected from someone without a lick of sense...

     Posted by usc1 at 02/19/2009 @ 07:05am

104. Where are the PUBLIC OPINION POLLS when we need them?

     Posted by bleedingheart at 02/19/2009 @ 07:31am

105. WHOOOOOOOSH!

     That would be the sound of Bushfools missing the point...not unexpected from someone without a lick of sense...

     Posted by usc1 at 02/19/2009 @ 07:05am

     Apparently another thing blood sucking ticks can't do-- play basketball.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 02/19/2009 @ 08:29am

106. Keeping families in homes they can not afford is not necessarily altruistic. It saves the banks and helps them keep the bodies hidden. Loan modification without PRINCIPAL REDUCTION is next to useless.

     Posted by puttch at 02/19/2009 @ 09:46am

107. Really Larry? Because I DID post it...5 hours prior. You just never bothered to read it...

     ...before passing juedgement on it.

     .

     For those under the delusion that the people being affected by the current situation were somehow irresponsible or stupid or greedy or whatever, here's a link to an all-to-common story...WWII vet, business man, civic leader...

     http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29198366/

     Posted by Lillian at 02/18/2009 @ 3:31pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     Posted by Lillian at 02/19/2009 @ 12:52am

     After reading the article, I stand by most of my conclusion. The man admits that he did not read the loan documents.

     But I also blame him for not having a family member or an attorney because of his age and physical condition to be with him at the loan signings.

     At the very least, why didn't the younger sister who says she tried to keep lenders away, go with him to the loan signings; or his children?

     I'm not excusing the lenders. Some of them seem like scum. But there is still personal responsibility in this, and you seem to not consider that to have any bearing.

     Posted by antisocialist at 02/19/2009 @ 10:40am

108. The article stated "All that was required was the exit of a president (George Bush) and a treasury secretary (Hank Paulson) who, in the best interpretation, were too economically inept to do what was needed"

     This is way too kind and not to mention greatly in error. GW Bush was inept only to the extent he lacked Reagans oratory skills GW Bush accomplished exactly what he intended to accomplish from day one. His economic policy was exactly what the Reagan GHW Bush policy was, and ended exactly the way the Reagan/Bush Adminitration did.

     It only differs in magnitude, as though the Reagan years were practice. Neil Bush as you may recall got 68 billion of the S&L bailout. The bank bailout was predictable and in the end is no different than the S&L bailout of the Reagan years. There is one difference and that is Reagans Stock Market crash was on a Monday and GW Bush's was on a Friday otherwise there is no difference, the end result was the same. The hard cold fact is Reagan opened the door and with the aid of Phill Gramm who removed the locks. GW Bush drained the economy dry. Personnally I put all my assets in gold the day Bush got elected at a range of $220 to $350; Gold is now over $900. Bush made no bones about his intentions and he succeeded masterfully.

     Posted by ROinReno at 02/19/2009 @ 10:40am

109. During the great depression farm based labor made up more than 80 percent of the economy. Even in those lean years farm owners always made sure that their help never starved. It was possible to get some work and even shelter in a farm shack. Strangers were never turned away and many were sent off with a swagger bag full of food. The economy soon started to recover. Better wages were offered in the big cities and farm laborers left. The good life was available to all that wanted to work. Times have changed and big cities are not able to provide the jobs. Once busy workers are now unemployed. And there are no farm owners left to save them. But hope is eternal. The U.S. government is now trying to feed and house those who have lost their jobs and have no place to go. Trillions are needed. We all must share the burden--it is wrong to refuse.

     Posted by melpol at 02/19/2009 @ 11:14am

110. Keeping families in homes they can not afford is not necessarily altruistic. It saves the banks and helps them keep the bodies hidden. Loan modification without PRINCIPAL REDUCTION is next to useless.

     Posted by puttch at 02/19/2009 @ 09:46am

     Without context-- what you're saying is useless.

     Families can't afford the home 'be-cause':

     a. lost job,

     b. contract fraud,

     c. health issue,

     d. divorce,

     e. death,

     f. etc.

     Helping them stay in their homes is the right thing to do and why we have a government of 'We the people'. If the banks did something illegal-- by all means prosecute them. But let's not throw the baby out with the bath water.

     It's way too easy to say something without the necessary context to validate the argument, making it way too simplistic to make it even semi-credible.

     For example: 'Rump Limppaw'.

     The name itself says something, but without additional context, doesn't say enough to substantiate the jab.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 02/19/2009 @ 11:18am

111. Posted by hsuBfools at 02/19/2009 @ 11:18am

     give me a S

     give me an O

     give me a C

     give me an I

     give me an A

     give me a L

     give me an I

     give me a S

     give me an M

     what's that spell?

     Posted by antisocialist at 02/19/2009 @ 11:35am

112. Posted by antisocialist at 02/19/2009 @ 11:35am

     give me a B

     give me an L

     give me an O

     give me an O

     give me a D

     give me an S

     give me a U

     give me a C

     give me a K

     give me an I

     give me an N

     give me a G

     give me a T

     give me an I

     give me a C

     give me a K

     what's that spell?

     Posted by hsuBfools at 02/19/2009 @ 11:56am

113. what's that spell?

     Posted by hsuBfools at 02/19/2009 @ 11:56am

     You-that's what socialism creates.

     Posted by antisocialist at 02/19/2009 @ 12:02pm

114. Posted by antisocialist at 02/19/2009 @ 12:02pm

     Of course, new con repub blood sucking tick denial.

     Kinda like you also think it's been working for you oh soooo well...

     Posted by hsuBfools at 02/19/2009 @ 12:38pm

115. Of course, new con repub blood sucking tick denial.

     Kinda like you also think it's been working for you oh soooo well...

     Posted by hsuBfools at 02/19/2009 @ 12:38pm

     Well it is difficult even with Republican presidents to maintain an individuality.

     But it does still work for me because I participate as little as possible in the system. I keep my wages low, my needs minimal, grow what I can, stay away from the medical system. The question is with Obama and Dems in Congress, whether we will have any individual freedom left in 4 years.

     Posted by antisocialist at 02/19/2009 @ 1:00pm

116. I'm not excusing the lenders. Some of them seem like scum. But there is still personal responsibility in this, and you seem to not consider that to have any bearing.

     Posted by antisocialist at 02/19/2009 @ 10:40am | ignore this person | warn this person

     .

     Actaully Larry, I do consider that - but can't understand why the folks on your side of the fence NEVER seem to apply the "personal responsibility" concept to...

     ...the mortgage brokers who "packaged" the loans, loan officers who approved the loans, the banks who sold the loans, the Wall Street investment houses who packaged these bad loans into toxic 'securities', or the investors who borrowed HEAVILY to purchase them.

     Posted by Lillian at 02/19/2009 @ 2:00pm

117. Actaully Larry, I do consider that - but can't understand why the folks on your side of the fence NEVER seem to apply the "personal responsibility" concept to...

     ...the mortgage brokers who "packaged" the loans, loan officers who approved the loans, the banks who sold the loans, the Wall Street investment houses who packaged these bad loans into toxic 'securities', or the investors who borrowed HEAVILY to purchase them.

     Posted by Lillian at 02/19/2009 @ 2:00pm

     I do Lillian. I was against the Financial bailout. I think anyone found guilty of a crime should be punished and I'm all for licensing brokers. I'm in insurance and I have to be licensed and bonded to engage in my business.

     Posted by antisocialist at 02/19/2009 @ 2:26pm

118. CNBC's Rick Santelli lashed out at President Obama's stimulus plan on Chicago's trading floor this morning. He was lauded by applause by other traders.

     Santelli asked traders on the floor: "This is America! How many of you people want to pay for your neighbor's mortgage that has an extra bathroom and can't pay their bills? Raise their hand. (no hands raised, lots of booing) President Obama, are you listening?"

     http://tinyurl.com/bv94j2

     And Santelli just reported on Hardball that his email is running 95% in support of his rant against the obam mortgage plan.

     Posted by antisocialist at 02/19/2009 @ 5:13pm

119. Why is spending for 'We the people' programs-- socialism? Yet bail outs or no bid contracts for corporations not fascism?

     Posted by hsuBfools at 02/19/2009 @ 6:35pm

120. CNBC Anchor Rick Santelli: Freaks Out About Housing Bailout... Doesn't Mention BIGGER Wall Street Bailout...

     Posted by hsuBfools at 02/19/2009 @ 6:47pm

121. And Santelli just reported on Hardball that his email is running 95% in support of his rant against the obam mortgage plan.

     Posted by antisocialist at 02/19/2009 @ 5:13pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     .

     Which proves...what? (Except that he's a bloviating BS'er who can wrap red meat around a bogus, loaded question and toss it to the sharks?)

     I wonder why he didn't ask..."How many of you WANT to throw an 85 year old WWII hero into the street for falling victim to the loan sharks in an effort to pay the medical bills for his wife of 57 years?!?!"

     Gee, do ya think the responses might have been somewhat different?

     Posted by Lillian at 02/19/2009 @ 6:48pm

122. No, not for new con repub blood sucking ticks...

     Posted by hsuBfools at 02/19/2009 @ 6:52pm

123. "And Santelli just reported on Hardball that his email is running 95% in support of his rant against the obam mortgage plan. Posted by antisocialist at 02/19/2009 @ 5:13pm | ignore this person | warn this person . Which proves...what? (Except that he's a bloviating BS'er who can wrap red meat around a bogus, loaded question and toss it to the sharks?)"

     The NBC evening news just reported that over 90% of mortgages in this country are in good standing and on time.

     If those stupid motherfuckers in Washington think there's any political gain (and it's ALL about political gain) in the homeowners bailout bill just sit back and watch the trainwreck.

     Rick Santelli for goddamn president!

     Posted by bleedingheart at 02/19/2009 @ 9:34pm

124. You-that's what socialism creates.

     Posted by antisocialist at 02/19/2009 @ 12:02pm

     so you don't favour a public police force?

     Posted by frosty zoom at 02/19/2009 @ 9:47pm

125. The question is with Obama and Dems in Congress, whether we will have any individual freedom left in 4 years.

     Posted by antisocialist at 02/19/2009 @ 1:00pm

     oh, come off it.

     Posted by frosty zoom at 02/19/2009 @ 9:48pm

126. You-that's what socialism creates.

     Posted by antisocialist at 02/19/2009 @ 12:02pm

     so you don't favour a public police force?

     Posted by frosty zoom at 02/19/2009 @ 9:47pm

     There is nothing socialist about having a police force. Or can a country be a right wing dictatorship with a police force and thus redefined as socialist.

     Frosty,

     When you remove freedom of choice about health care, education, housing, wages and employment, you have marxist socialism.

     Those are far different than local residents choosing to provide for police and fire dept's.

     Posted by antisocialist at 02/20/2009 @ 10:17am

127. The majority of distressed homeowners are people who have lost jobs and not people who got in over their heads knowingly. That seems to be the latest buzz word from the right that it's all down to these folks who "knew what they doing"!!!! To label all these poor folks as "irresponsible" is really just too much and typical of the Rep Party to find a label and run with it. Do they forget who was the "NO REUGULATION PARTY"...a lot of this nonsense came about by their incompetence and now have the nerve to be blaming regular hardworking people for their situation. They have formed a new party by look of it...The Vote No Party!! Such a waste of space the lot of them!!

     Posted by Caj at 02/20/2009 @ 11:37am

128. The majority of distressed homeowners are

     investors. by a ratio of 6 to 1, it has been reported.

     when a banker makes a loan to someone with insufficient assets, he has failed to perform due diligence. it is the bankers who are to blame.

     Posted by emile duBois at 02/20/2009 @ 12:35pm

129. Posted by Lillian at 02/19/2009 @ 2:00pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     it's the rating agencies who are most of all to blame. this would never have happened without their corruption

     Posted by emile duBois at 02/20/2009 @ 12:51pm

130. When you remove freedom of choice about health care, education, housing, wages and employment, you have marxist socialism.

     Posted by antisocialist at 02/20/2009 @ 10:17am

     You seem to only like fascistic (marriage of unitary exec and corporation) type control, apparently.

     So if it's between a future social type of service or our recent past disaster with fascism, guess which most people would prefer... McSame wasn't elected.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 02/20/2009 @ 4:22pm

131. So if it's between a future social type of service or our recent past disaster with fascism, guess which most people would prefer... McSame wasn't elected.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 02/20/2009 @ 4:22pm

     Your attempts at humor are just not cutting Fools.

     We have never had fascism, never had a situation even close to fascism, and is unlikely we ever will.

     The only Fascist govts/rulers the world has seen are

     Hitler/Germany

     Mussolini/Italy

     Franco/Spain

     Horthy/Hungary

     Corneliu Zelea Codreanu/Romania

     Salgado/Brazil-tried but was unsuccessful

     Posted by antisocialist at 02/20/2009 @ 5:25pm

132. When you remove freedom of choice about health care, education, housing, wages and employment, you have marxist socialism.

     Posted by antisocialist at 02/20/2009 @ 10:17am | ignore this person | warn this person

     .

     We have never had fascism, never had a situation even close to fascism, and is unlikely we ever will.

     Posted by antisocialist at 02/20/2009 @ 5:25pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     .

     Larry, one second, you're pretending we're on the verge of the leftist extreme, and the next you're trying to convince everyone we've never even been close to the opposite extreme.

     Your head must be absolutely spinning from the leaping, partisan, twists and turns!!!

     hehehe

     Posted by Lillian at 02/20/2009 @ 8:47pm

133. From what I read, you get nothing. You seem stimulated enough. However, your opinion is in the 'minority' and you have a 'poor' attitude for those less fortunate than yourself. My you never be called lazy while actually being injured in some unfortunate way. Posted by hsuBfools at 02/19/2009 @ 01:33am

     I am the "minority of minorities". You might refer to me as Tio Tomas (an Uncle Tom). Fully assimilated to American Society from a 3rd generation hard working blue collar family.

     I am stimulated enough to provide for myself. Caring enough to donate to local charities that give to those in need. Not the government that would take their cut then pass along 25% to the recipient and dictate. Thankful enough to set up a scholarship for those who ACHIEVE.

     Unfortunately fiscal responsibility is not an injury. The people this helps are not injured in some unfortunate way. This is abuse of the system. Taxing those that achieve to support those who choose not to try.

     My Union parents support my leecherous brother who will not work at McD, because he can sit on his ass for 9.50 hr and get unemployment. This bill is about creating a more dependent class on government disguised as "charity."

     Posted by apoorspic at 02/20/2009 @ 11:31pm

134. Posted by apoorspic

     sounds like you have some family issues. you should seek help for that.

     Posted by emile duBois at 02/21/2009 @ 12:40pm

135. New con repub blood sucking tick logic: if my leg isn't broken I don't see why a hospital should treat anyone else that does have a broken leg...

     Posted by hsuBfools at 02/22/2009 @ 10:45am

136. sounds like you have some family issues. you should seek help for that. Posted by emile duBois

     I have Obama in the White House. He'll get me government counseling and fix everything. Gee, that's swell.

     Posted by apoorspic at 02/24/2009 @ 12:18am