Media Mum on Barney Frank’s Fannie Mae Love Connection

Published on September 25th, 2008

Media Mum on Barney Frank’s Fannie Mae Love Connection — Geez, this stuff just writes itself.

Are journalists playing favorites with some of the key political figures involved with regulatory oversight of U.S. financial markets?

MSNBC’s Chris Matthews launched several vitriolic attacks on the Republican Party on his Sept. 17, 2008, show, suggesting blame for Wall Street problems should be focused in a partisan way. However, he and other media have failed to thoroughly examine the Democratic side of the blame game.

Prominent Democrats ran Fannie Mae, the same government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) that donated campaign cash to top Democrats. And one of Fannie Mae’s main defenders in the House – Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., a recipient of more than $40,000 in campaign donations from Fannie since 1989 – was once romantically involved with a Fannie Mae executive.

The media coverage of Frank’s coziness with Fannie Mae and his pro-Fannie Mae stances has been lacking. Of the eight appearances Frank made on the three broadcasts networks between Jan. 1, 2008, and Sept. 21, 2008, none of his comments dealt with the potential conflicts of interest… The Washington Post reported Frank, who is openly gay, had a relationship with Herb Moses, an executive for the now-government controlled Fannie Mae. The column revealed the two had split up at the time but also said Frank was referring to Moses as his “spouse.” Another Washington Post report said Frank called Moses his “lover” and that the two were “still friends” after the breakup.

48 users responded in " Media Mum on Barney Frank’s Fannie Mae Love Connection "

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url

# 1 snoopyjy said, on September 25th, 2008 at 6:34 pm

John are you seriously suggesting that the media is wearing blinders?!?! That is unheard of…

# 2 Higghawker said, on September 25th, 2008 at 6:34 pm

And the hits just keep comin!! This is just the beginning.

# 3 skunky said, on September 25th, 2008 at 6:35 pm

John, let’s remember that McCain’s CAMPAIGN MANAGER was on the payroll of Fannie and Freddie for being close to John McCain, no other reason.

$15k a month sounds like nice coin if you can get it… goes further to your point that the guy is surrounded by conflicts of interest and incompetents. No wonder he’s gonna lose badly.

# 4 deowll said, on September 25th, 2008 at 6:35 pm

I expect that there are dozens more in rather similiar circumstances as for as being best buddies with people that donated large sums of cash.

# 5 ECA said, on September 25th, 2008 at 6:42 pm

Excuse me,
But does ANYONE think that looking at EITHER side, will still get us ALL BF’ed in the end.

WHO killed all the OVERSIGHT, the monitors, the CONTROLS for these systems??

# 6 OvenMaster said, on September 25th, 2008 at 6:50 pm

#4: that’d be the two Republicans in Congress who were instrumental in getting the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 repealed in 1999 under Bill Clinton: Senator Phil Gramm (R-TX) and Rep. James Leach (R-IA).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act

# 7 OvenMaster said, on September 25th, 2008 at 6:52 pm

Also the Republican-sponsored Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm-Leach-Bliley_Act

# 8 MikeN said, on September 25th, 2008 at 6:56 pm

Isn’t Leach the guy that Barack Obama had speaking at his convention?

The guy who sponsored ban on internet gambling?

Why yes he was!

# 9 Ah_Yea said, on September 25th, 2008 at 7:01 pm

Oh, it gets far, far worse than this!

“Franklin Delano Raines (born January 14, 1949 in Seattle, Washington) is the former chairman and chief executive officer of Fannie Mae who served as White House budget director under President Bill Clinton….On December 21, 2004 Raines accepted what he called “early retirement” from his position as CEO while U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission investigators continued to investigate alleged accounting irregularities. He is accused by The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO), the regulating body of Fannie Mae, of abetting widespread accounting errors, which included the shifting of losses so senior executives, such as himself, could earn large bonuses…Civil charges were filed against Raines and two other former executives by the OFHEO in which the OFHEO sought $110 million in penalties and $115 million in returned bonuses from the three accused….In a settlement with OFHEO and the Securities and Exchange Commission, Fannie paid a record $400 million civil fine. Fannie, which is the largest American financier and guarantor of home mortgages, also agreed to make changes in its corporate culture and accounting procedures and ways of managing risk.”

And even better and better!!!

“James A. Johnson (born December 24, 1943) is a United States Democratic Party political figure….From 1991 to 1998, he served as chairman and chief executive officer of the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), the quasi-public organization that guarantees mortgages for millions of American homeowners. Previously, he was vice chairman of Fannie Mae (1990-1991) and a managing director with Lehman Brothers (1985-1990). An Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) report from September 2004 found that, during Johnson’s tenure as CEO, Fannie Mae had improperly deferred $200 million in expenses. This enabled top executives, including Johnson and his successor, Franklin Raines, to receive substantial bonuses in 1998. A 2006 OFHEO report found that Fannie Mae had substantially under-reported Johnson’s compensation. Originally reported as $6-7 million, Johnson actually received approximately $21 million.”

“But we now know that many of the senators who protected Fannie and Freddie, including Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Christopher Dodd, have received mind-boggling levels of financial support from them over the years.

And it just keeps coming!

“On July 16, 2008, The Washington Post reported that Franklin Raines had “taken calls from Barack Obama’s presidential campaign seeking his advice on mortgage and housing policy matters.” Also, in an editorial in August 27, 2008 titled “Tough Decision Coming”, the Washington Post editorial staff wrote that “Two members of Mr. Obama’s political circle, James A. Johnson and Franklin D. Raines, are former chief executives of Fannie Mae.”

Throughout his political career, Obama has gotten more than $125,000 in campaign contributions from employees and political action committees of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, second only to Dodd, the Senate Banking Committee chairman, who received more than $165,000.”

Yea, change you can believe in…

http://tinyurl.com/6gmldj
http://tinyurl.com/3k2u6f
http://tinyurl.com/445afb

# 10 Ah_Yea said, on September 25th, 2008 at 7:02 pm

Sorry for the longest post in history.

# 11 moss said, on September 25th, 2008 at 7:08 pm

Let’s see – Barney Frank got $40K over 19 years. That’s chump change for the McCain crew. They get more than that for 3 months:

http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=25263

# 12 lakelady said, on September 25th, 2008 at 7:08 pm

I have a fantasy of having all of the investment details of every congressperson, executive branch employee and member of the fed being public knowledge. Not just who’s contributing to their compaigns but what are their personal investments in.

Hey, I can dream can’t I?

# 13 Brock said, on September 25th, 2008 at 7:10 pm

FUnny how selective memory can be. Let me try to make it very simple. Who are the ones not paying the mortgages back causing the problems. Surely not the fat cat republicans, with all the wealth they’ve stolen from the common man.

As Gomer Pyles would say

“Surprise, Surprise, Surprise” –
It’s the unskilled low dollar wage earners who inhabit the lower end of the democrat party, who are dominated by the elitists, like Obama, Rangle and Kennedy, who think they were given the god given right to rule.

So, the real story of how this mess was allowed to continue was, per the New York Times, a bastion of conservative thinking

On Sept. 11, 2003 the New York Times ran an article that stated: “The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.” Democrats in Congress blocked any actions and by their failure prevented a solution to the predictable future problems.

In response to the Bush Administration overhaul plans, Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass), chairman of the Financial Services Committee, and then ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee said: “Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” and “The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”

Other contributing factors are the result of President Carter’s Community Reinvestment Ac, which forced banks to lend to un-creditworthy borrowers and prohibited redlining. Banks were required not only to lend to un-creditworthy borrowers but were required to loan in blighted areas. Thus banks were forced to make loans that contradicted sound banking practices because they incurred significantly higher risks.

President Clinton disregarded warnings from congressional members and instead moved in the opposite direction by requiring lenders to make even more subprime loans. Failures to do so caused lenders to be subject to being closed by the federal government.

When sound business principles are violated either through mismanagement or government intervention the result will eventually be financial disaster.

So in the end, McCain’s advisor may have taken a job representing Fannie May and Freddie Mac, that’s what people who pay bills do. But it is abundantly clear the Democrat party created the environment that resulted in the bust. Started with Carter, advanced by Clinton, and any attempt to put boundaries on the problem were prevented by Democrat controlled congress.

Bill Clinton is on Good Morning America today admitting that the Democrats blocked reform of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. I will give Clinton credit for NOT LYING. In the midst of a whirlwind of lies fostered by the Obama camp (or do they just not know), Clinton stands apart, refusing to lie. Interesting. This could be staging for 2012.

# 14 MikeN said, on September 25th, 2008 at 7:12 pm

Frank should be embarrassed to be involved in these bailout discussions. He helped cause this mess.

Even ten years ago, people were predicting this.

From the The New York Times
encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans.

increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people

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.”

http://tinyurl.com/3jdn9e

# 15 edwinrogers said, on September 25th, 2008 at 7:17 pm

“Fannie Mae” is English slang for a person’s bottom.

# 16 R.O.P. said, on September 25th, 2008 at 7:25 pm

It’s amazing Barney Frank survived the Bulger’s brothers years only to fall prey to this kind of crap. At the same time McCain’s campaign director made millions as a lobbyist trying to prevent constraints on the faulty economics of this mortgage catastrophe which McCain attacked on the first news of this issue.

# 17 bobbo said, on September 25th, 2008 at 7:42 pm

Sure seems to me that “by law” a GSE should not be allowed to contribute $ to a politician as it is indistinguishable from a bribe if not a conflict of interest? Same with all corporate contributions. No reason to give “free speech rights” to corporations.

Further, I am simply amazed at the Republicans in Congress actually acting as per their role under the Constitution==review and approval of Presidential Actions/requests/budget authority. Without good fiscally conservative Republicans finally having a spark of courage, this bailout would have been finished by now setting the stage for Bailout Horror Story.

I wish as a social liberal and a fiscal conservative, I wasn’t so alone.

# 18 Mister Mustard said, on September 25th, 2008 at 8:32 pm

#15 – Eddy

>>“Fannie Mae” is English slang for a
>>person’s bottom.

Uh, “fanny” is US slang for a person’s bottom. It’s UK slang for poontang, coochie, like that.

# 19 MikeN said, on September 25th, 2008 at 8:38 pm

I’m also surprised by the Republicans’ stand here. It’s partly because they are in the minority so they don’t have to take responsibility for anything, plus the Democrats have no interest in doing this alone. If the economy falls, well that’s on Bush, not them.

# 20 Lou Minatti said, on September 25th, 2008 at 8:58 pm

“If the economy falls, well that’s on Bush, not them.”

And that’s the problem. Congress is too chickenshit to act because they don’t want the blame. Even though most of them reaped handsome profits from the jizzbags engaged in the shady lending. Democrats and Republicans alike were bought off.

Throw them all in jail.

# 21 Carcarius said, on September 25th, 2008 at 9:55 pm

Ron Paul FTW

# 22 Buzz said, on September 26th, 2008 at 12:12 am

Can anyone seriously look at Barney Frank and say to themselves, “Now there goes a man who has his act together!”

I’m a Democrat. Barney is a slob. Mentally and physically.

And none of my opinion of him comes from this story.

# 23 Mister Mustard said, on September 26th, 2008 at 1:34 am

>>Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., a recipient of
>>more than $40,000 in campaign donations from
>>Fannie since 1989

FORTY THOUSAND DOLLARS IN 19 YEARS??? Haw! HAW! Is that a joke, a typo, what?

That’s $2105 per year. Forty bucks a week. He probably spends more than that on tips at Starbucks.

I’ll bet Dumbya spends more than that on gas for his brush-clearing chain saw! (Oh no, he gets the gas for free from President CHeney’s Secret Energy Cabal).

If this is a “scandal”, it’s not knocking my socks off.

If McBush’s campaign manager had been getting his $30K/month over that 19-year period, it would amount to $6,840,000.00. And FORTY THOUSAND DOLLARS is a scandal??

HAW!!

# 24 Mister Mustard said, on September 26th, 2008 at 1:37 am

#22 – Buzz

>>Barney is a slob. Mentally and physically.

Come on. You know you want him. The jowls. The turkey wattle. The WC Fields nose. He’s everything you could want an more.

And with that extra $40/wk he’s pocketing, I’ll be he could show you a real good time!

# 25 ECA said, on September 26th, 2008 at 2:02 am

i WONDER,
When it gets to “complected for the AVERAGE PERSON to understand” is it going the WRONG WAY.

Building a pyramid of WORDS and practices, and SO FORTH and the AVERAGE person cant follow the Logic or reasoning…ISNT it getting to complected?

In the end, it comes around to “WHOSE GOT THE MONEY”? when you cant point a finger, SOMETHING IS WRONG.

# 26 Noam Sane said, on September 26th, 2008 at 2:27 am

This post is about homophobia, not politics.

# 27 Esteban said, on September 26th, 2008 at 2:57 am

I think Barney Frank would prefer Freddie over Fannie.

# 28 Mister Mustard said, on September 26th, 2008 at 3:01 am

#26 – Sane One

>>This post is about homophobia, not politics.

**BINGO!!!**

You hit that nail right on the head.

# 29 BigCarbonFoot said, on September 26th, 2008 at 3:16 am

This has been brewing for decades. Everyone is at fault, Republicans, Democrats, Bush & Clinton. Each side blames it on the other exclusivley, bu notice no one is calling for an “investigation”. If it were really one-sided they’d already be having hearings. Truth is there won’t be any hearings because there’s no way to do it safely and just take the other guys down: they all go down.

This is all theater because in the end we’re all screwed.

# 30 Phydeau said, on September 26th, 2008 at 5:13 am

Uh, maybe the media’s mum on the love connection because it ended TEN YEARS AGO, according to the article (eighth paragraph).

Come on, people.

# 31 Alex Wollangk said, on September 26th, 2008 at 5:23 am

#29: That’s actually what I’ve noticed as well.

Everybody had their fingers in this particular pie in one way or another. Unfortunately everybody’s so busy blaming each other I’m afraid that the legislature is about to give away the treasury. If that happens we really are screwed.

Everybody is pointing at various Presidents and saying they each had this contribution or tried to fix it in such a way, but it’s Congress that is really the actual acting body here. Presidents don’t legislate so even if they put the entire weight of Presidential authority behind a certain bill, if it gets passed it’s Congress that passed it. Yes, there’s always the possibility of veto, but that’s a pretty weak argument. It IS a lot easier to point a finger at one man than a group of people whose action requires some level of cooperation from people on “your side” though.

Mostly I’m sick of the “Democrats this” and “Republicans that” and REALLY would like to see a breakdown of a *_REALISTIC_* forecast of the effects of the bailout vs. not bailing out.

If, as I suspect, not bailing out results in a few investors losing a bunch of money they had invested in something that wasn’t as sound as they thought, I say let them rot.

If not bailing them out means that they have to foreclose on 1.4 trillion dollars in mortgages, we may have to bite the bullet. That seems awfully high, though. That would be over $4500 for every man, woman and child in the entire country.

They’ve already admitted that the $700 Billion is just a big number that was completely invented. You can’t just make up numbers and expect the government to give you that much money. At least, you *_SHOULDN’T_* be able to…

# 32 contempt said, on September 26th, 2008 at 5:31 am

#24 Mister Mustard

Don’t forget Barney’s deep throat that has seen more traffic than I-40.

# 33 Paddy-O said, on September 26th, 2008 at 5:38 am

#17 bobo said, “No reason to give “free speech rights” to corporations.”

Or, Unions. Right?

# 34 jb said, on September 26th, 2008 at 6:10 am

Barney Frank was once romantically involved with a Fannie Mae executive? Dvorak sounds jealous!

# 35 Mr. Fusion said, on September 26th, 2008 at 6:28 am

#13, Brock,

If you are going to quote someone else, please provide the source and where that quote ends. Otherwise you become responsible.

Other contributing factors are the result of President Carter’s Community Reinvestment Ac, which forced banks to lend to un-creditworthy borrowers and prohibited redlining. Banks were required not only to lend to un-creditworthy borrowers but were required to loan in blighted areas. Thus banks were forced to make loans that contradicted sound banking practices because they incurred significantly higher risks.

Bullshit. There is no law forcing any bank to lend to “un-creditworthy” borrowers. What Federally regulated banks are NOT allowed to do is discriminate by any civil rights definition. If the bank would offer a loan to a majority (white male) person, they must also offer the same loan to a similar minority on the same terms. There is no part that states banks must lend to un-creditworthy customers.

Redlining was where banks would not lend to minorities in a specific area even though they would accept their deposits. Your comment that this forced the banks to incur higher risk is crap the wing nuts like to use to put the blame on minorities.

President Clinton disregarded warnings from congressional members and instead moved in the opposite direction by requiring lenders to make even more subprime loans. Failures to do so caused lenders to be subject to being closed by the federal government.

Not true. The Fed makes the rules and answers to Congress, not the President. The Fed may work closely with the Treasury Department, but the President doesn’t make the rules.

Bill Clinton is on Good Morning America today admitting that the Democrats blocked reform of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae

I don’t watch Good Morning America. How did Democrats block reform when the Republicans controlled Congress, the White House, and the Supreme Court? BTW, that reform would have moved oversight from an independent agency to the Treasury Department and thus under Mr. Oversight, the President.

# 36 bodiddlie said, on September 26th, 2008 at 6:32 am

#31 – Alex

The theory is that if nothing is done, then the credit markets will lock up as the lenders don’t have the capital to make new loans. Since there is no demand in the markets for these mortgage-backed securities, the lenders can’t sell them off to free up capital. Everyone paints the picture of people not being able to purchase a home, but the real danger with frozen credit markets is in the business world. New businesses would be very hard to start as it would be near impossible to get a loan to start up. Seasonal businesses would fold up as they couldn’t obtain lines of credit to get through down times. Companies would have difficulty meeting payroll, job loss, and then the downward spiral into recession and possibly depression.

Again that’s all in theory. It’s possible also that the businesses that are hurting could be allowed to fail, and the ones that have been prudent could snatch up those assets for pennies on the dollar, ala JpMorgan Chase.

Now, I’m no economist, but the bailout plan as it has been presented, seems like bad news. We’re gonna buy up these, for all intensive purposes, worthless securities, and hope they regain their value? While at the same time pumping more money into the system, thereby turning the dollar into a peso? So many of these securities are based on over-valued homes. There’s no way we could make back 100% of what we put in.

So I was thinking yesterday, and again I’m not an economist by any stretch of the imagination, so this could be (and probably is) not a good idea at all. Instead of buying these MBS’s, let’s establish a value for them and then freeze trading on any that were issued before today’s date. At the same time, the treasury can open up a loan window to these institutions, taking a controlling portion of the companies stock as collateral.

Now, some of the institutions would probably have to further write down their books based on the established value, but the loans would give them the capital needed to start loaning themselves again. And the freeze on trading these would keep that value locked until everything is stabalized. Only a small portion of mortgages will default in the end anyway.

This would also give congress time to figure out how to stop this from happening again (yeah right).

# 37 stopher2475 said, on September 26th, 2008 at 6:33 am

Why is Dvorak constantly shilling for the neocons? 40k over 20 years is less than what McCain’s campaign manager took in 3 months. If I was a conservative group I would make sure I gave small donations like that to the other side (keeping my big money for the people I really support) so that hacks could blog about how the people I’m against are taking the money too.

# 38 Paddy-O said, on September 26th, 2008 at 6:38 am

#37 “Why is Dvorak constantly shilling for the neocons?”

I don’t know. Maybe because the rest of his bloggers shill for the socilist’s?

Or, maybe it seems that way as he’s the only one that posts stuff his blogger’s don’t want to see the light of day?

# 39 Mister Mustard said, on September 26th, 2008 at 7:26 am

#38 – O’Furniture

>>Or, maybe it seems that way as he’s the only
>>one that posts stuff his blogger’s don’t want
>>to see the light of day?

Like what? That Barney Frank took $40/week in campaign contributions, while McBush’s lackey was raking in $6,000,000.00 over a 5-year period??

I’m as happy as a pig in shit that this information is seeing the light of day!!

I’ll put Barneys $2105/yr against McBush’s ONE POINT TWO MILLION a year any day of the week.

I think there are a lot of things Barney Frank can be criticized for, but taking $5.71/day from the mighty banking empire is not one of them.

When I ask myself “why [I] have to read this stuff on a blog”, the answer I come up with is “nobody gives a shit anywhere else”.

# 40 Buzz said, on September 26th, 2008 at 8:49 am

#37 “Why is Dvorak constantly shilling for the neocons?”

Human nature. Dvorak wants decisive leaders who can boil down issues into seven word soundbites, stick to their guns through hell and contravening new information, look and play the part of a Hollywood screentest winner, and speak in well-modulated oval tones.

He wants an idealized version of himself. And much of that happens to look neo conish.

# 41 brendal said, on September 26th, 2008 at 9:52 am

John…you missed the best part of this story! Heard today on Laura Ingraham’s radio show that Moses left Fannie to start…

a pottery business.

It just doesn’t get any better than that.

# 42 MikeN said, on September 26th, 2008 at 11:44 am

Keep trying Fusion. Bill Clinton says the Dems blocked reform. Very convenient as he also says he pushed for it. Not above him to throw the party under the bus for his own legacy.

How can they block reform? If one party is unified against something, it doesn’t happen in Washington, especially when you have a filibuster in the Senate.

The whole issue of redlining was exactly that. The Justice Department and other agencies were pushing minority and majority as equally credit-worthy, which is not true. They would claim a bank was violating civil rights if they didn’t have equal percentages. Of course you knew this already, but just want to shill for your party.

# 43 god said, on September 26th, 2008 at 1:57 pm

I haven’t lived in Mass for over 20 years; but, everyone knew back then that Barney was gay. I guess that’s a shock to JCD’s non-christian morality.

But, we’re supposed to be equally upset because the dude he broke up with over 10 years ago worked for Fannie Mae. Should we worry about who he diddled in college, too?

WTF – before I met my better half, there were time I couldn’t remember who I was fucking 10 years before. Was that supposed to be important enough to blog about?

# 44 Mark T. said, on September 26th, 2008 at 2:24 pm

I found this enlightening:

http://tinyurl.com/49hd7n

# 45 Ah_Yea said, on September 26th, 2008 at 6:27 pm

#44 Mark.

An excellent video. This video excellently lays out exactly what happened and who was responsible.

Does anyone but me realize that passing out these bad loans through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac was the equivelent of money laundering? Passing a bad loan through Freddie Mac with the government promise of financial backing to make the loan “good” is similar to passing dirty money through a bank to make it “clean”?

# 46 Michael said, on September 26th, 2008 at 7:40 pm

You should really try using sources other than right wing hit piece sites for sources, John.

# 47 Brock said, on September 30th, 2008 at 2:57 am

#35 Fusion

Here’s a tip – Learn how to research and read about history.

Here’s your proof, but of course you’ll never view it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

# 48 Uncle Sam said, on October 20th, 2008 at 12:50 pm

What we need is a big overhaul of the way our Government is run! Our term limits need to be changed to no more than eight years. We need to remove special interest and lobbyist out of Washington. Our elected Congress and Senate need go to work for all Americans and their best interest. The politicians in Washington are looking out for them selves and not for us.
The Fannie Mae and the Freddie Mac mess need to be investigated and the guilty need to be brought to Justice. The people that allowed the U.S. citizens to buy homes that were beyond their means should be dealt with, hopefully with a penalty. The fact is some good people have lost their homes the rest of us are penalized now and for years to come! The people that received millions of dollars in an undeserved bonus -“Golden Parachutes” owe the money back to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Do these people have no pride in how they conduct them selves. Is this
no better than stealing? Why should anyone receive political donations from this government ran a huge nightmare that no one wants to take the blame for?

Leave Your Reply Below...

Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
show up immediately, please don't submit it again.

Special Deals 4U

25% off eHarmony subscription with code EHTECH
12-percent discount forever with code TECH
10-percent discount and free month using TECH10
10-percent or 30 dollars off weekly car rental!
Get 10-percent discount on car rental!
Get 10% off rental cars!
Get 10% off Dollar rentals!
Discounts on domain names!