Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush Called For Reform of Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac 17 Times in 2008 Alone... Dems Ignored Warnings
Gateway Pundit | September 21, 2008

Posted on 09/22/2008 12:22:43 AM PDT by Zakeet

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

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

The White House released this list of attempts by President Bush to reform Freddie Mae and Freddie Mac since he took office in 2001.

Unfortunately, Congress did not act on the president's warnings:


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: cap; demron; dodd; economy; fanniemae; frank; freddiemac; govwatch; housing; housingbubble; mediabias; missinglink; msm; treasury
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-92 next last

A long list of warnings is presented in the original article here.

Anybody out there dumb enough to believe the MSM idiots report this?

1 posted on 09/22/2008 12:22:43 AM PDT by Zakeet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

Interesting, considering that in 2002 President Bush Promised 440 Billion Additional Dollars for Freddie and Frannie mortgages for minorities.


2 posted on 09/22/2008 12:26:20 AM PDT by trumandogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

we also warned them that we need to reform social security, medicare and medicaid but nobody listens and they will also fall apart soon


3 posted on 09/22/2008 12:31:22 AM PDT by ari-freedom (We never hide from history. We make history!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

Did y’all know that David Gregory’s wife was the Executive Vice President-General Counsel of Fannie Mae for the past several years? (She resigned on Friday.)

Beth Wilkinson. One of her claims to fame is that she wore $2,000 suits to work in a quasi-gubmint agency.


4 posted on 09/22/2008 12:46:41 AM PDT by fightinJAG (Rush was right when he said: "You NEVER win by losing.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

You have to give George W. Bush credit for trying to head off the subprime mortgage meltdown in a timely manner. I’m not aware of any other options he had available than what he used once the situation started deteriorating.


5 posted on 09/22/2008 12:55:19 AM PDT by Post Toasties (It's not a smear if it's true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Post Toasties

Do you also give him credit for this?

“I introduced two of the leaders here today — they call those people Fannie May and Freddie Mac, as well as the federal home loan banks, will increase their commitment to minority markets by more than $440 billion.”


6 posted on 09/22/2008 1:05:01 AM PDT by trumandogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

He was duped.


7 posted on 09/22/2008 1:15:43 AM PDT by library user
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Post Toasties
"You have to give George W. Bush credit for trying to head off the subprime mortgage meltdown in a timely manner."

I wonder if it was due to solely to sub prime lending or sub prime lending to affrimative action types with little or no down payment.

8 posted on 09/22/2008 1:21:40 AM PDT by NoLibZone (Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac - are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' Barney Frank 9-10-03)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

ping for later


9 posted on 09/22/2008 1:22:56 AM PDT by Miztiki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: library user

Duped into dumping 440 Billion of our tax dollars into Fannie and Freddie?

No, just as complicit as Barney Frank and the GOP led Congress.


10 posted on 09/22/2008 1:22:59 AM PDT by trumandogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

Fascinating...and in the comments section at the link an anonymous poster (posted in full without citing) a Daily Kos (interesting) take on the situation.

Thanks for posting


11 posted on 09/22/2008 1:25:38 AM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz; Perdogg
You didn't even list a year for your quote. I did some research and found out he (Bush) said that way back in the Summer of 2002. Isn't it a bit disingenuous to not even tell your reader when Bush said that?

Remember that even the Perdogg post, which was an amazing find, by the way, was about a NY Times article from Sept. 2003, some 15 months later.

There's a good chance the President did not realize the full scope of what was going on until the Summer or Fall of 2003, thus his idea for a new agency to over these two companies, at that time.

12 posted on 09/22/2008 1:28:41 AM PDT by library user
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: library user

over = oversee


13 posted on 09/22/2008 1:30:02 AM PDT by library user
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

The RNC needs to make an ad.

Since 2001, Republicans have repeatedly called for housing government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) reform. Each time Democrats in Congress emphatically denied there were problems.

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

Not only did democrats not act on these warnings but Barack Obama put one of the major Sub-Prime Slime (Pritzer) on his campaign as finance chairperson.


14 posted on 09/22/2008 1:32:05 AM PDT by igoramus08
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: library user

Good Point:

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

However, in 2002 the President increases Freddie and Frannie money for mortgages for minorities by 440 Billion.

Looks to me that in June 2002 he no longer had the concerns that he expressed in April of 2001.


15 posted on 09/22/2008 1:35:33 AM PDT by trumandogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

The fact that George W. Bush does not walk on water (have godly prescience) does not make him the devil or fool you apparently want to believe him. If you want spend your time blaming GWB for it all and ignore the responsibility that Democrats in Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Congress bear, I think your priorities are way off.


16 posted on 09/22/2008 1:38:16 AM PDT by Post Toasties (It's not a smear if it's true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Post Toasties

I blame everyone in Washington for the current economic disaster and will not accept the current administration’s ushering of socialism simply because it is led by a Republican.

If it had been a Democratic administration doing the same thing I would be livid and am livid at the GOP administration for nationalizing industry and propping up markets as if this were Venezuela.

No, Barney Frank and the Democrats do hold the blame but as we see from a 2002 Speech Bush was more than willing to give away 440 Billion of our tax dollars for sub prime mortgages.

The GOP House and Senate could have stopped this nonsense but elected not to do so.


17 posted on 09/22/2008 1:48:34 AM PDT by trumandogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

Does anyone wonder about the timing of all of this, not long before the election? Could this have been manipulated to have happened at this time in hopes of it hurting the Repubs? What has Soros been up to lately? Is he involved in this at all for instance? It seems the Dems have long been out to destroy America. Communist maybe or are they just dumb, greedy and power hungry as well as being totally depraved?


18 posted on 09/22/2008 1:55:51 AM PDT by Bellflower (A Brand New Day Is Coming!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz
I can't disagree with what you say. In fact, I feel similarly. GWB should have shown more financial restraint rather than trying to cozen Democrat and minority favor with government money.

But right now, the Democrats are trying to paint this as being solely GWB's fault when it should be made plain to the electorate that it is they who are primarily culpable.

19 posted on 09/22/2008 1:59:31 AM PDT by Post Toasties (It's not a smear if it's true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Post Toasties

I will be hardest on GWB because as a Texan I voted for him eight times and expected more of him than this. He has taken actions that would make FDR Blush and Hugo Chavez proud.

I am pissed because he and Paulsen have sold my children down the river with a trillion dollars in debt.

If a Democrat had done all of this, I would be just as pissed.

And it is troubling that simply because GWB has an “R” next to his name that many of the finest Conservatives in this nation, right here on FR are cheering his actions which has turned us into a socialist state overnight.


20 posted on 09/22/2008 2:09:05 AM PDT by trumandogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz
Looks to me that in June 2002 he no longer had the concerns that he expressed in April of 2001.

This could be true, however, it appears his concerns resurfaced in 2003. Personally, I think Bush foresaw the Fannie/Freddie meltdown back in 2003, and did what he could, from 2003 to 2008. That's five long years.

21 posted on 09/22/2008 2:19:28 AM PDT by library user
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet
President Bush publicly called for GSE reform 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted.
22 posted on 09/22/2008 3:34:07 AM PDT by Alia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: library user
There have always been problems with the CRA issue called "disparate impact", and I have posted on this recently. The President was absolutely right to encourage home ownership - this not only grows microeconomies but additionally reduces other burdens. I've also posted on this recently. But were it not for the economic plans of the Bush Administration, a great many people in the lower brackets would not have been able to buy a home.

And, minorities tend to predominate that layer called "lower brackets". The reasons why they predominate that level is numerous. Thomas Sowell has written periodically about this, for years. The hope was, that as more were able to buy homes, finally and maybe the stick the Socialists and Con Artists were using (CRA, ad nauseum) to beat the American public about would be neutered.

This is NOT the same as asserting the President was part of "the con". He wasn't.

I know you aren't suggesting he was, and I'm merely adding to your post.

23 posted on 09/22/2008 3:41:02 AM PDT by Alia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz
New York Times 2003: Dems Oppose Bush Plan To Rein in Fannie and Freddie
24 posted on 09/22/2008 4:26:06 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (In VP's, McCain picked the future, Obama chose the past.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

Yes, I have read the article that you posted but it does not explain why it 2002 President Bush promised 440 BILLION in Fannie and Freddie Sub Prime Loans to Minorities not does it explain why the GOP Congress did not act on the 2003 Bush recommendations.


25 posted on 09/22/2008 4:38:26 AM PDT by trumandogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

I see. And you never make a decision and find later that you were wrong and try to correct it. The article states that the Dems blocked what he wanted. Add Rinos to the mix and you tie the Presidents hands.


26 posted on 09/22/2008 4:42:28 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (In VP's, McCain picked the future, Obama chose the past.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Post Toasties
I’m not aware of any other options he had available than what he used once the situation started deteriorating.

Nonsense. All he had to do was to make it clear that any firm buying mortgage backed securities was doing so one hundred percent at its own risk. If this had been done as late as early 2006 (by which time the problem was obvious) the current mess need not have happened.

27 posted on 09/22/2008 4:49:39 AM PDT by Notary Sojac (America's never won a "war" unless the enemy was named using a proper noun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

I have made plenty of decisions that I regret and that had personal economic consequences. However, with the bail out of banks and Wall Street and the nationalization of AIG, it would appear that the FED has created an economic environment where the chosen few cannot fail and instead are saved by the tax payer.

I call that a Socialist State.

And I have been in Socialist nations and even lived in one and I hate socialism.


28 posted on 09/22/2008 4:49:41 AM PDT by trumandogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

You can call it anything that you like. What do you suggest should be done instead when a business can’t make the payroll because they were invested in one of these failing entities? It’s the trickle down theory with catastrophic consequences. Not being an economist, I don’t know if there was a better solution. I just know we are in deep doo-doo. The big guys fail and it takes smaller businesses down with them. I also know that Bush and McCain tried to stop it and were blocked.


29 posted on 09/22/2008 4:56:27 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (In VP's, McCain picked the future, Obama chose the past.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

B-U-M-P everyone’s accusing me


30 posted on 09/22/2008 4:59:04 AM PDT by Skooz (Gabba Gabba we accept you we accept you one of us Gabba Gabba we accept you we accept you one of us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

btt


31 posted on 09/22/2008 4:59:41 AM PDT by KSCITYBOY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

I would never suggest that we nationalize industry and that is exactly what has occurred. However, I would suggest that people take responsibility for their economic actions and if they made a bad investment or have a house in foreclosure or loaned money to the wrong person that they deal with the consequences as opposed to forcing me, my children and grandchildren to pay for their stupid mistakes.


32 posted on 09/22/2008 5:10:32 AM PDT by trumandogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz
However, I would suggest that people take responsibility for their economic actions and if they made a bad investment or have a house in foreclosure or loaned money to the wrong person that they deal with the consequences

Yup. That'll solve it. Every business that invested in these companies should go belly-up. That'll help the economy!/sarc off

33 posted on 09/22/2008 5:20:34 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (In VP's, McCain picked the future, Obama chose the past.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW
What do you suggest should be done instead when a business can’t make the payroll because they were invested in one of these failing entities?

In Capitalism, some people fail while other people win.

In Socialism, no body fails and no body wins.

As for me, call me a radical Conservative, I am for Capitalism!

However, I understand that some people fear Free Markets and want the Government there to save the day with MY tax dollars.

34 posted on 09/22/2008 5:21:24 AM PDT by trumandogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz
I'm a capitalist too but as I said I am not an economist. All I know is that another 1920's style stock market crash wouldn't help us. And I DO believe that Raines, Johnson and others need to be investigated and stripped of their enrichment that came at others expense.

However, I understand that some people fear Free Markets and want the Government there to save the day with MY tax dollars.

That wasn't a free market. That was a rigged market.

35 posted on 09/22/2008 5:27:32 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (In VP's, McCain picked the future, Obama chose the past.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW
Every business that invested in these companies should go belly-up.

Yes they should. You see, life in a Free Market is not a game of Pee Wee Baseball where they don't keep score and there are no losers.

Instead, a Free Market has Winners and Losers. Well, that was the case until the last week when the Fed Killed the Free Market.

So now that you are in favor of socialism can you name any other industries that you would like to nationalize?

36 posted on 09/22/2008 5:27:51 AM PDT by trumandogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

“Yup. That’ll solve it. Every business that invested in these companies should go belly-up. That’ll help the economy!/sarc off”

What makes you so sure that just because a business exists, proved itself unable to manage itself properly should be allowed to continue to exist SOLELY on government money?

Do you genuinely think the economy is better off with failed businesses still operating funded by government bailout money?

I don’t.


37 posted on 09/22/2008 5:28:06 AM PDT by RFEngineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

How can you be a Capitalist when you advocate the Federal Government Nationalizing Industry?


38 posted on 09/22/2008 5:29:14 AM PDT by trumandogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

Again, that was not a free market. It was rigged. Books were cooked. THAT is not a free market.


39 posted on 09/22/2008 5:30:53 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (In VP's, McCain picked the future, Obama chose the past.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

[Excerpt]

Shame on you Chucky, you are the Chairman of Congress’ Joint Economic Committee and a vocal critic of the Bush administration, shame and you Chris Dodd, you are the Senate Chairman of the Banking Committee on Housing and Urban Affairs, you Mr. Dodd, you got sweetheart loans as did your liberal friends like Senator Obama that most Americans have no ability to get, with special clauses which include no penalties, low interest rates, no fees etc. that brings me to Barney Frank, you are the Chairman of the Financial Services Committee and you promised the American voters in 2005 and 2006 this would not happen on your watch, but each of you sirs, you all lied!

Did you three think that conservative Bloggers and radio talk show hosts like me have forgotten that President Bush, and Senator John McCain tried to get you and the rest of the House and Senate to pass new sweeping oversight legislation back in 2003 and again in 2005?

Bush and McCain supported the creation of a new agency within the Treasury Department that would have had the power to oversee the financial dealings of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and change the current legislation that historically left that power within the oversight of congressional committees which at the time were in the hands of Republicans, not Democrats. It is important to note that both Bush and McCain recognized the problems that poor oversight and mismanagement posed and that was at least part of the reason why they wanted to put the oversight of the banking, mortgage, home loan and insurance industries into the hands of the Treasury Department not partisan congressional leaders of either party.

Why didn’t you three or the “Dali-Bama” push for the passage of sweeping banking, mortgage lending and loan insurance reform legislation back in 2003 and 2005? Bush, McCain and hundreds of economists saw this disaster coming, but oh no not you!

Simply stated it was because Schumer, Dodd, Frank and your cronies like Reid, Rangel, Murtha, Boxer, Diane “Franken-Feinstein”, Hillary “Rotten” Clinton, and Nancy “Stretch” Pelosi were too busy concentrating on blocking every piece of legislation on the Presidential wish list just to make the administration look bad. The plan was to keep the public and the news media focused on the war in Iraq, all in an effort to swing power back to liberal Democrats prior to the election.

Well you three back benchers it worked and thank you for this mess we are in. Now you and so many others on the liberal left, including Senators Joe Biden and Barack Obama want to cry foul... and it stinks sirs.

President Bush and John McCain saw this coming and you three did nothing, just because you clowns were in the middle of a big power grab you all chose to sit on your hands while leading in the charge to do nothing! You and so many others like you on the left refused the pass the FDIC Banking Reform Act of 2005 H.R. 1185 and you also refused to pass the Mortgage Regulatory Reform Act of 2005. Each of you claim now that Republicans have supposedly pushed us into this mess, yet you all continually blocked the passage of proposed Republican legislation to prevent it, just so you could win an election!

Mr. Schumer you made the move on your own accord in June to leak letters you had sent to federal bank regulators, saying that the financial position of IndyMac Bank “poses significant risks to both taxpayers and borrowers” and then went on to ask “if federal regulators were prepared to take measures that would help prevent the collapse of IndyMac or minimize the damage should such a failure occur.” After that little note of yours Senator Schumer sent shock waves through the financial sector there was a $1.3 billion dollar run on the bank.

Less than one month later IndyMac was seized and the house of cards that congress could have prevented in 2003 started to fall and fall fast. At the time it was the second-largest bank failure in U.S. history. The banks employees and investors blamed Schumer for IndyMac’s failure calling the leaking of the of the letters “reckless and grossly irresponsible.” Over 50 former IndyMac employees, sent a letter to California Attorney General (and confirmed fellow moonbat) Jerry Brown stating that “Because of a malicious, politically motivated act of Charles Schumer, our lives have been shattered.”

Because he and other nutty liberals want to try and hold Republicans accountable for the mess when it was Republicans who tried to get congressional Democrats to reach across the aisle and alter the current course of events back in 2003 and again in 2005. House and Senate Democrats, including Schumer, Dodd and Frank have accused the Bush administration of doing nothing to keep people from accepting loans they could not actually afford. Then to try and sweep this and all the other financial ruin under the rug and make the problem go away it was Schumer, Dodd, Frank and others that pressured the President to sign the Mortgage Relief Act a month ago.

[End Excerpt]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2084816/posts


40 posted on 09/22/2008 5:31:02 AM PDT by Seattle Conservative (God Bless and protect our troops and their CIC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: RFEngineer

If six months ago you would have told me that Freepers would be singing the praises of the Government NAtionalizing Industry and buying out people’s bad investments I would have said that you were out of your mind.

But there you have it, some are singing the praises of government socialist economic actions that would make FDR Blush.


41 posted on 09/22/2008 5:32:54 AM PDT by trumandogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Seattle Conservative

“I introduced two of the leaders here today — they call those people Fannie May and Freddie Mac, as well as the federal home loan banks, will increase their commitment to minority markets by more than $440 billion.”

GWB June-2002


42 posted on 09/22/2008 5:35:54 AM PDT by trumandogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: RFEngineer
You misunderstand. Smaller companies invested money with these rigged, failed companies. It isn't just the biggies going down. Smaller companies who thought their investments safe also lost their capital. They believed the cooked books.

For the 3rd or 4th time, I am not an economist. I don't know if there was an alternative answer. All I know is that there are smaller companies that cannot make their payrolls because of the failure of these bigger, dishonest entities. This failure is bigger than just Lehman, Fannie & Freddie and AIG. There are a whole host of others that they are taking down with them.

43 posted on 09/22/2008 5:36:30 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (In VP's, McCain picked the future, Obama chose the past.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

Caveat emptor


44 posted on 09/22/2008 5:37:11 AM PDT by trumandogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

AGAIN, I am not an economist. I don’t know if there was a viable alternative. What I DO know is that smaller companies lost their operating capital when these companies failed. This would not be a simple recession but more like a depression.


45 posted on 09/22/2008 5:39:29 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (In VP's, McCain picked the future, Obama chose the past.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

With COOKED BOOKS?!


46 posted on 09/22/2008 5:40:23 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (In VP's, McCain picked the future, Obama chose the past.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Seattle Conservative

There are some who see it in black and white and STILL don’t get it.


47 posted on 09/22/2008 5:42:28 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (In VP's, McCain picked the future, Obama chose the past.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

“You misunderstand. Smaller companies invested money with these rigged, failed companies. It isn’t just the biggies going down. Smaller companies who thought their investments safe also lost their capital. They believed the cooked books”

I get it. You have my sympathies, but not my willingess to float any small company that lost everything.

If you have a product or service to sell, declare bankruptcy and sell it again. Maybe you were an innocent victim, but you are screwed just the same. Lesson: Don’t trust your money to just anyone.

Good luck


48 posted on 09/22/2008 5:44:38 AM PDT by RFEngineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

Yes, inaction may have brought on tough times for you and I. However, this action, in spending over a TRILLION DOLLARS will bring tough times for our children, grand children and great grandchildren.

As for me, I would prefer we have reality and do the tough times now as opposed to saddling future generations with a TRILLION DOLLARS of debt.


49 posted on 09/22/2008 5:46:33 AM PDT by trumandogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: RFEngineer
but not my willingess to float any small company that lost everything.

Actually what I think they want is the guilty brought up on charges. Lying and cheating is illegal.

50 posted on 09/22/2008 5:46:53 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (In VP's, McCain picked the future, Obama chose the past.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-92 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson