Palin finally speaks, and as suspected, has not a clue

Search

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
14,280
Tokens

Speaking before voters in Colorado Springs, the Republican vice presidential nominee claimed that lending giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had "gotten too big and too expensive to the taxpayers."


The companies, of course, aren't taxpayer funded but operate as private companies. The takeover may result in a taxpayer bailout during reorganization.



:ohno:

 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
At least she didn't say she was sorry to see the great comedian Freddie Mac had died this past month at the young age of 50.
 

Banned
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
3,981
Tokens
How desperate is the Huffington Post to point to an Obama/Biden-like rhetorical gaffe by Sarah Palin?
This desperate: (Hat tip: HA Headlines)
Gov. Sarah Palin made her first potentially major gaffe during her time on the national scene while discussing the developments of the perilous housing market this past weekend.
Speaking before voters in Colorado Springs, the Republican vice presidential nominee claimed that lending giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had “gotten too big and too expensive to the taxpayers.” The companies, as McClatchy reported, “aren’t taxpayer funded but operate as private companies. The takeover may result in a taxpayer bailout during reorganization.”
Economists and analysts pounced on the misstatement, saying it demonstrated a lack of understanding about one of the key economic issues likely to face the next administration.
“You would like to think that someone who is going to be vice president and conceivable president would know what Fannie and Freddie do,” said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. “These are huge institutions and they are absolutely central to our country’s mortgage debt. To not have a clue what they do doesn’t speak well for her, I’d say.”
The only ones without a clue here are the HuffPo’s Obama water-carriers.
As I wrote four years ago about the Fannie/Freddie racket:
Clothed in politically correct fashions (”Catch the dream,” beckons Freddie Mac’s program to boost minority home ownership; a “leader in diversity,” brags a Fannie Mae press release), these public-private hybrids are two dangerous pigs feeding at the federal trough. Congress created Fannie Mae (nickname for the Federal National Mortgage Association) in 1938 to bolster home ownership during the Depression. Three decades later, it was partially privatized, but retained a host of government benefits. In 1970, Congress spawned Freddie Mac (nickname for the Federal Home Mortgage Corp.) to provide a lending competitor to Fannie Mae. Both entities expand the pool of money for home purchasers by snapping up loans that lenders make to homebuyers, and then converting those loans into relatively safe mortgage-backed securities that are attractive to investors.
So, what’s wrong with this picture?
As Fred Smith, president of the Washington, D.C-based Competitive Enterprise Institute, has noted, these financial beasts are a textbook example of “profit-side capitalism and loss-side socialism.” When things go right for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, they keep the profits. But when things go wrong, taxpayers — not just private shareholders, managers, and employees — will be on the hook.
Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae each receive $2.25 billion lines of credit with the U.S. Treasury. These special pipelines give the institutions an implied federal guarantee available to no other private sector competitors in the mortgage market. That protection makes them immune to the costs normally associated with riskier and riskier behavior. Moreover, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not required to pay state and local income taxes. In addition, the standard for how much money the government requires them to keep on hand in case homebuyers default on their mortgages is lower for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae than for fully private banks and thrifts. The two corporations receive an estimated $10 billion a year in hidden taxpayer subsidies.
Political appointees to the companies’ boards pocket millions in stock options to bolster support on Capitol Hill. Clinton-appointed board members at Fannie Mae include Marc Rich lawyer Jack Quinn and Janet Reno’s lieutenant at the Justice Department, Jamie Gorelick. At the helm of Fannie Mae is another Clinton appointee, Franklin Raines, who was paid more than $4 million and had almost $6 million in unexercised stock options in his first year at the helm. Cheerleaders in both major political parties have opposed privatizing Fannie and Freddie.
Now, we are on the verge of bailing out these behemoths to the tune of $200 billion in taxpayer backing — while potentially forking over untold millions in severance packages to Democrat cronies.
That makes Palin in tune with reality — and her critics flailing once again.
Meantime, King of All Gaffes Obama has problems against with rewriting history:
O-Busted: Selective Service Requirement Did Not Exist When Obama Says He Registered
And the Biden Gaffe Clock keeps on ticking.
 

Everything's Legal in the USofA...Just don't get c
Joined
Jun 27, 2007
Messages
2,199
Tokens
How desperate is the Huffington Post to point to an Obama/Biden-like rhetorical gaffe by Sarah Palin?
This desperate: (Hat tip: HA Headlines)
Gov. Sarah Palin made her first potentially major gaffe during her time on the national scene while discussing the developments of the perilous housing market this past weekend.
Speaking before voters in Colorado Springs, the Republican vice presidential nominee claimed that lending giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had “gotten too big and too expensive to the taxpayers.” The companies, as McClatchy reported, “aren’t taxpayer funded but operate as private companies. The takeover may result in a taxpayer bailout during reorganization.”
Economists and analysts pounced on the misstatement, saying it demonstrated a lack of understanding about one of the key economic issues likely to face the next administration.
“You would like to think that someone who is going to be vice president and conceivable president would know what Fannie and Freddie do,” said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. “These are huge institutions and they are absolutely central to our country’s mortgage debt. To not have a clue what they do doesn’t speak well for her, I’d say.”
The only ones without a clue here are the HuffPo’s Obama water-carriers.
As I wrote four years ago about the Fannie/Freddie racket:
Clothed in politically correct fashions (”Catch the dream,” beckons Freddie Mac’s program to boost minority home ownership; a “leader in diversity,” brags a Fannie Mae press release), these public-private hybrids are two dangerous pigs feeding at the federal trough. Congress created Fannie Mae (nickname for the Federal National Mortgage Association) in 1938 to bolster home ownership during the Depression. Three decades later, it was partially privatized, but retained a host of government benefits. In 1970, Congress spawned Freddie Mac (nickname for the Federal Home Mortgage Corp.) to provide a lending competitor to Fannie Mae. Both entities expand the pool of money for home purchasers by snapping up loans that lenders make to homebuyers, and then converting those loans into relatively safe mortgage-backed securities that are attractive to investors.
So, what’s wrong with this picture?
As Fred Smith, president of the Washington, D.C-based Competitive Enterprise Institute, has noted, these financial beasts are a textbook example of “profit-side capitalism and loss-side socialism.” When things go right for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, they keep the profits. But when things go wrong, taxpayers — not just private shareholders, managers, and employees — will be on the hook.
Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae each receive $2.25 billion lines of credit with the U.S. Treasury. These special pipelines give the institutions an implied federal guarantee available to no other private sector competitors in the mortgage market. That protection makes them immune to the costs normally associated with riskier and riskier behavior. Moreover, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not required to pay state and local income taxes. In addition, the standard for how much money the government requires them to keep on hand in case homebuyers default on their mortgages is lower for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae than for fully private banks and thrifts. The two corporations receive an estimated $10 billion a year in hidden taxpayer subsidies.
Political appointees to the companies’ boards pocket millions in stock options to bolster support on Capitol Hill. Clinton-appointed board members at Fannie Mae include Marc Rich lawyer Jack Quinn and Janet Reno’s lieutenant at the Justice Department, Jamie Gorelick. At the helm of Fannie Mae is another Clinton appointee, Franklin Raines, who was paid more than $4 million and had almost $6 million in unexercised stock options in his first year at the helm. Cheerleaders in both major political parties have opposed privatizing Fannie and Freddie.
Now, we are on the verge of bailing out these behemoths to the tune of $200 billion in taxpayer backing — while potentially forking over untold millions in severance packages to Democrat cronies.
That makes Palin in tune with reality — and her critics flailing once again.
Meantime, King of All Gaffes Obama has problems against with rewriting history:
O-Busted: Selective Service Requirement Did Not Exist When Obama Says He Registered
And the Biden Gaffe Clock keeps on ticking.


EXACTLY. So for readers of the Huffington Post, we'll spell out the implied part of her remarks that any reasonable person could infer and would agree with: They've gotten too big and expensive to the taxpayers WHO HAVE TO UNDERWRITE THEIR LOANS AND SUBSIDIZE THEIR MISMANAGEMENT."
 

"Lock and Load"
Joined
Dec 19, 2005
Messages
543
Tokens
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/H9poCWnGIb8&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/H9poCWnGIb8&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>


It should be entertaining.
 

Conservatives, Patriots & Huskies return to glory
Handicapper
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
87,149
Tokens
Palin right, yet again. No wonder the country loves her.

Do you think Biden might bring up his 3 Iraqs proposal? Biden ain't going to do shit. Biden is fine example of Obama's incredible lack of judgment.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2000
Messages
15,635
Tokens
BHO is going to look like Adm. Stockdale in the debates!

Or this guy...

_39299531_aminap.jpg
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,879
Messages
13,574,618
Members
100,879
Latest member
am_sports
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com