Freddie and Fannie were questioned years ago for
Posted By: their tactics. Dems said there was "no problem& on 2008-11-08
In Reply to: Uhhhh.....so what do you call this? (sm) - Just the big bad
nm
Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old. To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
More on Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac...
Freddie found itself in Justice Department crosshairs in 2003, after it finally admitted to years of accounting schemes to underreport its earnings...to the tune of $5 billion. Freddie paid a $125 million fine to federal regulators, more than $400 million in shareholder lawsuit settlements, and $3.8 million in civil fines to settle Federal Election Commission charges of improper political fundraising.
Freddie's creative accounting was nothing compared to Fannie's. As determined by two separate federal reports in 2004 and 2006, Fannie Mae out-and-out cooked the books so the bigwigs at the top could rake in millions in windfall profits. The Washington Post reports that Fannie misstated its earnings by about $10.6 billion from 1998 through 2004. all so fraudulent multimillion dollar bonuses could kick in for Fannhie's bigwigs.
Those Fannie Mae bigwigs who cashed in on the cooked books? Chairman Franklin Raines, Bill Clinton's OMB director...A whopping $52 million. Vice Chair Jamie Gorelick (remember her from the 9-11 Commission hearings), Clinton's deputy ATTORNEY GENERAL, $15 million. Chairman and Chief Executive James A. Johnson, liberal lobbyist (the one who was kicked off Obama's VP vetting committee...looks like they should have vetted their committee) due to his role in the Countrywide financial scandal...$1.9 million. Raines and the CFO of Fannie Mae were ousted.
Dems, loathe to clean up Fannie and Freddie houses even though Greenspan said preventitive action needed to be taken "sooner than later," came up with a "reform bill" in early 2005. The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) mandated that Fannie and Freddie had to start handing out mortgages to "minority and moderate income buyers." Whether these new customers were creditworthywas of little concern; Congress had race and bean-counting to achieve. And now they basically owned half of the US housing market.
And now the American taxpayer is bailing out BOTH of these companies.
Is Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac the Democrat's Enron? Sure looks like it to me.
And incidentally, Franklin Raines has been advising the Obama campaign on the mortgage and housing issues....ahem.
We own AIG, Fannie and Freddie
Maybe the international community wants their money back now. Maybe that is why credit markets are frozen. Since AIG and Fannie and Freddie are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States, the world is lining up for their securitized mortgages to be repaid.
Maybe this bailout is not to buy up bad debt, but to pay off bad debt the government has already bought, insured, and now needs to ask us money for to pay. WE ARE BEING LIED TO AGAIN!
freddie and fannie
SHOT IN THE FANNIE MAE
The History of a Financial Disaster
1997
Fannie Mae is a GSE (Govt. Sponsored Entity) regulated by Congress.
Fannie Mae buys mortgages from other companies.
It is backed by the taxpayers for all losses, but keeps all profits.
President Clinton loosens Home Loan Requirements.
1998
Banks begin making thousands of bad loans,0 down, no documentation, for 120%! (1998 – 2008).
Executives at Fannie receive huge bonuses if loan targets are met.
Franklin Raines and Jamie Garelick from the Clinton Administration are appointed to run Fannie Mae.
2003
President Bush proposes a new oversight committee to clean up Fannie Mae, but Democrats derail the effort.
Rep. Melvyn Watt, (D-NC) Committee on Financial Institutions & Consumer Credit. stated, "I don’t see much other than weakening the bargaining power poorer families to get affordable housing."
1999 - 2004
Raines earns $100 million in bonuses.
Garelick earns $75 million in bonuses.
In 2004, Enron collapses, congress investigates, Executives Skilling & Lay go to jail, for fraudulent bookkeeping.
Congress responds with the Sorbanes-Oxley Act, more heavy regulation of corporations.
2004
An OMB investigation finds massive fraudulent bookkeeping at Fannie Mae.
False numbers triggered executive bonuses every year.
Congress holds no hearings, no one goes to jail, or is punished.
WHY NOT?
1999 -2005
Fannie Mae gives millions to Democratic causes, examples: Jesse Jackson & ACORN.
Fannie Mae pays millions to 354 congressmen and senators, from both parties.
Who got the most money?
Top 4 Recipients
Top 4 Recipients
2005
Franklin Raines & top execs are forced to resign from Fannie Mae.
They do not go to jail.
There is no media "perp. walk."
They keeps all of their bonuses
They finally pay $31.4 million in civil fines.
2005
The Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act is sponsored by:
2005
None of the top 4 recipients support the legislation.
The reform act is blocked by Democrats, never even making it out of committee.
None of the politicians return any of the money, tainted by fraud.
2008
Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac go bankrupt and the govt. takes them over completely.
Lehman Brothers, goes bankrupt from investing in bad mortgages.
AIG get $85 million in loan guarantees, after insuring bad loans & projects.
Taxpayers will ultimately pay BILLIONS.
2008
Franklin Raines is now an advisor to the Obama Campaign which wants the govt. to take over more of the economy.
Did government involvement in the mortgage market work out?
How will even MORE government involvement make it better? Do you want to be Sweden?
McCain favors revising regulations & loan standards, selling off Fannie & Freddie.
SOURCES
Congressional Record, 5/25/06
"Hannity & Colmes," Fox News, 9/16-9/17/08
Herald Tribune, 4/18/08
New York Times, 9/13/03
www. govtrack.com, 9/17/08
Obama on Freddie and Fannie
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/stateupdates/gG5WlF
McCain and Fannie and Freddie
Contributions from Fannie and Freddie's boards of directors and lobbyists, who are technically not employees. That analysis found Fannie and Freddie-related contributors gave $169,000 to John McCain and his related committees, compared with $16,000 to Obama and his related committees.
The other money Obama received was from employees and their families, not the corporation.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/727/
Dems and the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac fiasco...
Collapse or the Democrat Swindle of the U.S. Taxpayer
In 2006 an election year, the Democrats were still trying to lay the Enron scandal on Bush and the Republicans. With the help of the press a cover up of a larger financial scandal was taking place. A scandal that we are paying for today. In 2006 a 3 year investigation into fraud at Fannie Mae was concluded. It revealed a level of financial misconduct by Franklin Raines, Jamie Gorelick, and others that grossly overstated earnings by 10.6 Billion dollars. To gain bonuses.
For those who don't know both Raines and Gorelick were high ranking officials in the Clinton Administration.
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/07/top-senate-recipients-of-fanni.html
http://eddriscoll.com/archives/013595.php
Hillary supporter's take on fannie/freddie....
I hope you haven’t just eaten, because what you are about to read will disturb you–and well it should. It’s proof that John McCain foresaw the Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae disaster in 2006– and tried against all Obama-Like minds to ward it off.
Below are John McCain’s remarks urging the passage of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, which he co-sponsored and which was rendered “Dead” in Congress.
Guess who prevailed and didn’t take heed? Or more appropriately, guess who deliberately “looked the other way”?
This is all we need to know to understand exactly WHICH candidate in this election is willing to break some eggs when it comes to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac–two organizations that, with the help of certain Democrats, deliberately redistributed wealth the easy way. Now we are all paying for it, as intended all along. Just as John McCain warned below.
As we view the carnage, this is all we need to know to understand exactly WHICH candidate foresaw this carnage we are witnessing, and which candidate worked to convince the other candidate to help avoid it. It is all we need to know to recognize exactly WHICH candidate had the right judgment and was looking out for the rest of us.
Joe Biden? It’s time for US to be Patriotic? No. It’s time for YOU to be patriotic. In fact, it’s too late. As for you saying, “It’s time to be part of the deal”. We want no part of this “deal”. And what a “deal” it was!
May 26, 2006
Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae’s regulator reported that the company’s quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were “illusions deliberately and systematically created” by the company’s senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.
The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight’s report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae’s former chief executive officer, OFHEO’s report shows that over half of Mr. Raines’ compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac.
The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator’s examination of the company’s accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.
For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac–known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs–and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO’s report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO’s report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.
Quick Info
S-90 Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005
Last Action: Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Status: Dead
I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190,to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.
I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.
Update: Well looky here. Here’s a glowing Wall Street piece on Obama, written in June 2008. You would think Mr. “Regulator” Obama really is Jesus looking out for us! But…..here’s the paragraph that hooked me–the paragraph that haunts today:
He characterized the senator as a quick study on financial services, citing his early support of efforts by Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd and House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank to empower the Federal Housing Administration to help struggling homeowners.
Oh they “empowered” all right. The Democrats killed this bill while Dodd, Frank and Obama fiddled and helped Fannie and Freddie cook their books, continue to tank, all the while keeping the regulators out of their way. These are the guys who killed the bill that McCain fought for. The bill that would have avoided the financial disaster we witnessed during the past two weeks. In the meantime, take a look at which senators were feeding at the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac trough. My party is not what it used to be. My party has not only let me down, but it has also screwed me and my country in the process.
Note: All of these facts can be independently confirmed if you are interested in the truth of this matter.
More on Barney Frank and fannie/freddie...
http://www.businessandmedia.org/printer/2008/20080924145932.aspx
Fannie/Freddie going to cost 7 billion...
if we are lucky.
Thank the dems for defending Freddie, Fannie,etc.
nm
Dems are the real cause of Fannie and Freddie
nm
That's because Fannie and Freddie are in his back pocket
He received a lot of money from both places. Would you go against them if you get large election donations and low housing costs with cheap mortages? I don't think so. That's why he has to go. He is just as corrupt as the others.
McCain saw Fannie/Freddie coming in 2005...
and sponsored legislation which the Democrats blocked.
John McCain did anticpate the problems with GSEs and see them as a systemic financial problem. He even sponsored legislation to deal with it, and this is what he said:
"I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole."
McCain deserves credit for being on the right side of this. Meanwhile, Obama in just four years in the Senate raked more contributions from Fannie and Freddie than any other Senator in the last 19 years — save Chris Dodd, who's pretty demonstrably in the pocket of Big Mortgage.
Fannie and Freddie....Barney Frank, Chris Dodd...
you left them off your list. The two MAJOR players. Who got the most donations from fannie/freddie? Barack Obama and Chris Dodd. Obama got more from them in his 3 years than other senators did in 20. You do the math and follow the money.
She is a psychological basket case whose own peers have questioned her sanity for years.
x
That's what he said after he was questioned on it...
apparently others agreed; the bill did not pass.
No one questioned yours because.....
it was not legislated like same sex marriages. Again, government (who claims we need less government) stepped into people's bedrooms and decided what is "best" for them because we, the people, are too stupid to make decisions for ourselves.
Obama has a lot he should be questioned
http://www.waronfreedom.org/dox/BONoUsCitizen.htm
I was not questioned by you, and I would not bother
nm
Former CEO of Freddie Mac is a pub, had to return millions he thieved
http://www.reuters.com/article/bankingfinancial-SP/idUSN0642989720071107
http://www.nndb.com/people/222/000163730/
Emanuel Was Director of Freddie Mac During Scandal...
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=6201900&page=1
Emanuel Was Director Of Freddie Mac During Scandal
New Obama Chief of Staff, Others on Board, Missed "Red Flags" of Alleged Fraud Scheme
By BRIAN ROSS and RHONDA SCHWARTZ
November 7, 2008
President-elect Barack Obama's newly appointed chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, served on the board of directors of the federal mortgage firm Freddie Mac at a time when scandal was brewing at the troubled agency and the board failed to spot "red flags," according to government reports reviewed by ABCNews.com.
According to a complaint later filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission, Freddie Mac, known formally as the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, misreported profits by billions of dollars in order to deceive investors between the years 2000 and 2002.
Emanuel was not named in the SEC complaint (click here to read) but the entire board was later accused by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) (click here to read) of having "failed in its duty to follow up on matters brought to its attention."
In a statement to ABCNews.com, a spokesperson said Emanuel served on the board for "13 months-a relatively short period of time."
The spokesperson said that while on the board, Emanuel "believed that Freddie Mac needed to address concerns raised by Congressional critics."
Freddie Mac agreed to pay a $50 million penalty in 2007 to settle the SEC complaint and four top executives of the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation were charged with negligent conduct and, like the company, agreed to settle the case without admitting or denying the allegations.
The actions by Freddie Mac are cited by some economists as the beginning of the country's economic meltdown.
The federal government this year was forced to take over Freddie Mac and a sister federal mortgage agency, Fannie Mae, pledging at least $200 billion in public funds.
Freddie Mac records have been subpoenaed by the Justice Department as part of its investigation of the suspect accounting procedures.
Emanuel was named to the Freddie Mac board by President Bill Clinton in 2000 and resigned his position when he ran for Congress in May, 2001.
Freddie Mac Misrepresented Income, Says SEC
During the years 2000, 2001 and 2002, according to the SEC, Freddie Mac substantially misrepresented its income to "present investors with the image of a company that would continue to generate predictable and growing earnings."
The role of the 18-member board of directors, including Emanuel, was not addressed in the SEC's public action but was heavily criticized by the oversight group (OFHEO) in 2003.
The oversight report said the board had been apprised of the suspect accounting tactics but "failed to make reasonable inquiries of management."
The report also said board members appointed by the President, such as Emanuel, serve terms that are far too short "for them to play a meaningful role on the Board."
As a Congressman, Emanuel recused himself from any votes dealing with Freddie Mac until just this year.
In dealing with the nation's economic crisis, the new White House chief of staff will almost certainly be involved in discussions about the house and mortgage markets.
Emanuel's spokesperson said, "As White House chief of staff he will work with President-elect Obama and his economic advisers to help ensure we protect taxpayers and homeowners."
Fannie Mae's CEO & Obama
Fannie Mae's CEO (Daniel Mudd) calls Obama and the Democrats the "Family" and "Conscience" of Fannie Mae.
The recent bank failures were caused by the Housing Crisis, which was caused by Mortgage Lenders handing out BILLIONS of Dollars in bad loans and the biggest offenders: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
The "Family" and "Conscience" of Fannie Mae and Congress, THE DEMOCRATS, failed miserably and now WE the Tax Payers are stuck paying for their screw-ups.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=usvG-s_Ssb0
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are semi-private lending institutions crated by the Clinton administration and the Congressional Democrats, designed to make mortgages available and more affordable to more people and to act as moderators for the mortgage industry. They DO NOT follow the same STRICT government regulations that other lenders must follow. They have huge MULTI-MILLION dollars budgets to lobby congress and to pay large political contributions to keep regulators off their backs.
The TOP THREE U.S. Senators getting BIG political contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are DEMOCRATS and the #2 recipient was none other than BARACK OBAMA.
1. Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-CT).. $165,400 (Chairman of Senate Banking Committee) 2. Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL)....... $126,349 (Only 4 yrs in the Senate) 3. Sen. John Kerry (D-MA).......... $111,000 What is it about Barack Obama that makes him the #2 recipient of pay-offs even ahead of John Kerry and others, even though he is only a Freshman in the Senate?
Many Washington Democrats have gone to work at Fannie and Freddie after leaving Washington and have mad MILLIONS of Dollars in the process.
As early as 2005 the Congressional Black Caucus and Barack Obama KNEW that Fannie Mae was failing but "THE FAMILY" Democrats and OBAMA took payoffs to do NOTHING about it.
Obama was in the room during this speech. He heard about the problems that faced Fannie Mae and yet he did NOTHING about it.
During the THREE years following the day when he heard this speech about Fannie Mae's problems, Obama received $126,349 in payoffs from Fannie Mae to keep quiet and DO NOTHING about their disastrous lending practices. Now Obama blames John McCain for the Housing Crisis and the bank failu res and says that HE can fix it.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac got a Federal bailout when it became obvious that they were bankrupt. Yet the Federal Government allowed Lehman Brothers to collapse pushing our economy over the edge.
Obama has been attacking McCain and Republican policies for the current financial turmoil. However, "...Senator Obama was at the head of the line when the piggies lined up at the Fannie and Freddie trough for campaign bucks." __________________
Fannie Mae/NY Times
Check out the date on this. Of course, this came as no surprise to me. It's surprising to ever find an objective article from the NY Times, but sometimes they surprise us.
Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending
By STEVEN A. HOLMES
Published: September 30, 1999
In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.
The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets -- including the New York metropolitan region -- will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring.
Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.
In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans from finance companies that charge much higher interest rates -- anywhere from three to four percentage points higher than conventional loans.
''Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990's by reducing down payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman and chief executive officer. ''Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.''
Demographic information on these borrowers is sketchy. But at least one study indicates that 18 percent of the loans in the subprime market went to black borrowers, compared to 5 per cent of loans in the conventional loan market.
In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.
''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.''
Under Fannie Mae's pilot program, consumers who qualify can secure a mortgage with an interest rate one percentage point above that of a conventional, 30-year fixed rate mortgage of less than $240,000 -- a rate that currently averages about 7.76 per cent. If the borrower makes his or her monthly payments on time for two years, the one percentage point premium is dropped.
Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, does not lend money directly to consumers. Instead, it purchases loans that banks make on what is called the secondary market. By expanding the type of loans that it will buy, Fannie Mae is hoping to spur banks to make more loans to people with less-than-stellar credit ratings.
Home ownership has, in fact, exploded among minorities during the economic boom of the 1990's. The number of mortgages extended to Hispanic applicants jumped by 87.2 per cent from 1993 to 1998, according to Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies. During that same period the number of African Americans who got mortgages to buy a home increased by 71.9 per cent and the number of Asian Americans by 46.3 per cent.
Fannie CEO is Daniel Mudd
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gPfdSGL82ufTASVrfgCbKslcCYPgD92M2NI03
Bush orchestrated Fannie Mae F-up
The former chief executive officer of Fannie Mae says the Bush administration helped orchestrate an accounting scandal that cost him his job and that he wants to use White House documents to defend himself in a shareholder lawsuit.
Franklin Raines, who served as President Clinton's budget director, argues in court documents that the Bush administration felt the government-chartered agency wielded too much power in the mortgage industry. His attorneys say the White House pushed regulators to weaken Fannie Mae and triggered a $6 billion accounting scandal.
Raines subpoenaed the White House for documents in July. Justice Department lawyers will go before a federal judge Thursday to fight it.
Relying primarily on articles by financial journalists and the testimony of industry analysts, Raines describes in court documents an unofficial task force dubbed "Noriega" that was formed to weaken Fannie Mae and drive down its stock price.
Fannie Mae is the largest U.S. buyer and backer of home loans. It was created by Congress but is publicly traded. Raines says the Bush administration wanted to undermine confidence in the agency so it could push for tighter government controls.
You think O is a good guy? He profited from Fannie
nm
you tube video on freddy and fannie
For this you have to wait at least 3 years and 8 months , maybe 7 years and 8 mohths...nm
nm
Foreign investors. China and Russia insisted on Fannie Mac bail out.
dd
Not quite- 2 years Catholic, 2 years Muslim. NM
X
In 100 years, no one will that's for sure. NM
...
Could be, he's never come on TV? Years ago maybe?
x
oh, okay, but he followed him for 20 years!
nm
Which was 4 years ago....
nm
You were 16 years old once...
what if it was said about you, about your daughter if you had one....or about your mother when you were 16?.....come ON now. YOu know how vulnerable girls are at that age. That was a really really really LOW below the belt hit. Mean and nasty.
Except for the first 6 years.
In other words, 75% of the time. Even when they did, they didn't. It's kinda hard to advance a meaningful agenda when being subjected to the acid ink in the runaway veto pen.
I think it's because he's up in years
I also get the same impression, but to be realistic one must consider that she may become President if something were to happen to him.
what, are you now 2 years old?
i just have to roll my eyes sometimes.
Well, a few years ago when we had that...
stocket market tank (all though it did not last all that long) was enough for me...took my 401K money (not a huge amount, but I need it to be there) and put it in traditional IRA's that in federally insured bank. I am not young enough to let it build back up with stock market ups and downs. Younger folks a lot more years in the work force can wait for it to build back up (and it always has), but I can't take the risk.
I don't think small private banks are at risk.
It was much worse than this when Carter was in the White House and we managed to get through that...this too shall pass. A little saying I once heard seems to sum it up...."When one door closes, another opens, but it is he11 in the hallway for awhile." :)
The only way we'd get another 8 years is
if the dems are still in control against a pub president.
I heard the above comment in either an ad or in the debate itself and I almost flipped. You don't hear much about it yet, but it will come out sooner or later (and hopefully sooner).
Yes in in the last two years
the econmy took a dive. Gas prices rose and made the price of everything soar. That is what you get under democratic leadership.
I did years ago n/m
nm
That's over three years old......you just now
X
For 2 years out of 8
x
I'm sure you will be for the next 4 years
all the way to the bank with other people's hard earned money...
maybe in 100 years
Our kids will tell stories about us working six days a week, all hours of the day and night to stay at home with them. About how we had no health insurance, but somehow we managed to pay those hospital bills. How the mortgage broker tried to get us to refinance one more time, but we saw through the scam. How did we ever make a car payment for 5 years without going crazy? How we competed with workers in a virtual world and still managed to out produce them. Maybe they will think that we were pretty tough too. I think we are!
Just the first of many to come in the next 4 years....
sorry, I have to raise taxes; sorry, I have to continue the war in Iraq; sorry, I can't provide healthcare for everyone; sorry, I have to change the constitution; sorry, I can't keep any of the promises I made while campaigning; sorry, I have no experience dealing with terrorists, sorry, I fooled you into voting for me.
GP, my DH and I have been saying this for years. sm
We have long been advocates of sending the illegals back, closing our borders, cut the pork, etc. I am so glad there are others out there. This is going to my sens and reps. Especially as DH gave them all an earful yesterday. We need everybody out there to send this along.
I don't have 10-20 years. I have 4
unless I want to work until I'm 70 or 80. What kind of mind will i have then? Will I be able to figure out what a doc is saying?
I'll probably be one of those homeless people in another 10 years unless they straighten out all the problems. I certainly will not be able afford the taxes we pay on our property, even though it's free and clear of a mortgage. At tha rate they expect taxes to rise, I'll be out on the streets.
The O will not be able to stop it. There's too many factors changing the economy. I'm just hoping things wil l straighten out, but I no longer have any faith in our government, no matter who runs the country. The so-called respresentaves are only out for themselves in the past few years and it doesn't matter who's in charge.
Write your congressmen or senators and what do you get? A "canned" letter that they will take your suggestions "under consideration" and "are doing whatever they can to fix the situation". I'm tired of it. It's the same old, same old.
O has reneged on some of his promises already. He spoke in all those other countries when he was running for prez (and isn't there a law against going to a foreign country to make promises(?) if he becomes president? He smoothed over so many countires that they thought they were finally going to get a prez that would straighten out the U.S. and all of a sudden, he is for Israel and against the Muslin terrorists communities. "Scuse me, butl lying to other ountries doesm't cut it.
I can only hope that O will keep some of his other promises bvut I don't see how he can with the economy the way it is at this pointl So all those people who voted for O with the hope of change (remember those who stated they would not have to worry about their mortgage, etc.), it ain't gonna happen.
O is a smooth talker and I almost fell for his ideas, but when I started to really think about it, there's no way he can accomplish all he plans to do, even in 8 yeras.
Well, I'll get off my soap box now. These opinions are mine and mine alone. You may not agree with my thoughts, but there's no reason to bash me for my honest opinion.
Yes, I am better off than I was 8 years ago...(sm)
However, since two years ago and the advent of the democratic congress, I am a tad worse....
but still better than the Clinton years.
Bracing for getting even worse under the O.
It's a fact that the economy always downturns under a democratic congress....double whammy with a democrat in the white house, too.....oh joy, what a ride we're all in for.
Yes, I am better off than I was 8 years ago...(sm)
However, since two years ago and the democratic majority in congress, I am a bit worse, down 20% in earnings.
But still much, much better than the Clinton years.
Bracing for getting even worse under Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Franks, and that whole lot.
It's a fact of economics, that there is always a downturn under a democratic congress....double whammy with a democrat in the white house, too.....oh joy, what a ride we're all in for.
|