posted September 29, 2008 07:37 PM            

According to O'Bomber, Bush and McCain did it.

posted September 29, 2008 08:11 PM            

Pelosi is wrong on Clinton's great budgetary skills. It means nothing. The non factor is good economy , which I always attribute to neo con actions taken by the republican predessors. The Dems are great spenders, more government employees on payroll (means more entitlement) all from our tax money.

Do they even know that Utopia is really an imaginary place? Perhaps their socialism will work over there. Nuff said.

Oh BTW, thank the 95 democrats in the house for halting this bailout. Truly great Americans.

posted September 29, 2008 08:48 PM            

Bush did it.
Bush did it.
Bush did it.

He's apparantly single handedly responsible for everything that's gone wrong in the world since, well, hell, since the beginning. The End.

posted September 29, 2008 09:12 PM            

No one in politics is a saint. No one party is ever fully clear when it comes to bad behavior and bad decisions. But this particular fiasco takes the cake. The CRA was a bad idea. Subprime mortgages to "help" people buy a house when they could not afford to pay for one was a bad idea. Refusing to allow regulation and oversight on these disasters in the making was a bad idea ... and has nothing to do with discrimination but thanks for trying Bush and McCain and everyone else.

And Nancy Pelosi and Dem. Co refusing to take any responsibility for this fiasco when their fingerprints are all over this is undeniably wrong. Maybe they're counting on enough people not understanding economics and just hating Bush enough to never bother and check the facts.

posted October 04, 2008 10:20 AM            

The fingerprints on the meltdown of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have demoscat fingerprints and they're in full view for anyone who cares to have even a casual look. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are the principle cause of the meltdown in our financial markets today.

The push by demoscats in congress to loosen lending standards to qualify people for home mortgage loans who could not meet income requirements is and was the major cause of the Fannie and Freddie collapse.

The debt to income ratios were at one time about 40% debt to income. If a person seeking a mortgage loan had reoccurring debt like car loans, credit card payments, boat loans, ect, AND the new mortgage payment was factored in which exceeded 40% of their annual income they didn't qualify, period. Forget about down payment requirements. Loans were being made for 100% of the contract price and even up to 125% of contract price. Imagine that; going to a closing on a home purchase and walking away from the closing table with 25% of the contract price as cash in their pockets. They were literally paying people to buy and a hell of a lot of those people were not in any way credit worthy to buy what they were buying.

demoscats changed bank lending practices and began to threaten lenders to relax their lending guidelines...and I do mean threaten them. Lenders responded in the only way they could and began making risky loans which they knew would raise their foreclosure ratios. Fannie and Freddie bought most of those loans, then packaged the clinkers in bundles of less risky loans and resold the bundles...all over the world.

Through all of this period..from the early 1990s right up through 2006, republicans were trying to get accounting contols and tighter financial standards through congressional oversight and institutional regulatory agency controls over Fannie and Freddie. The screeching and howling from demoscats who used Fannie and Freddie top management positions as a reward and enrichment program for demoscat supporters and former Clinton administration officials was deafening. Now, the very same demoscats who caused the problem are pointing their grimy little fingers at Bush and McCain. Yep, that's right; Barack Hussein O'Bomber, one of the guilty are blaming the very people who attempted to correct the oversight and regulatory deficiencies at Freddie and Fannie...and their lying rhetoric is also deafening now.

Barney Frank, Maxine Waters and the cast of other congressional socialists, including Chris Dodd were telling everyone there was no problem at Fannie and Freddie. This at a time when those being rewarded with high level jobs at Fannie and Freddie were looting both quasi governmental institutions. Those like Franklin Raines, Jamie Goerlich and Tim Johnson..now working as financial and economic advisors for Barack Hussein O'Bomber. Listen, there are a great many CEOs, CFO's and high level corporate managers in prison for doing the very same things O'Bomber's advisors did. Inflating the value of mortgages they held; hiding defaulted loans and a host of other illegal accounting initiatives to boost the bottom line to make themselves eligible for huge bonuses. These were not isolated and rare occurrances; they were institutional fraud intended to deceive both congress and private and corporate investors who bought Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac stock and lost their money when Freddie and Fannie went belly up. No one is talking about bailing these investors out...it's just "tough luck" investors.

This was going on while Fannie and Freddie were making gifts/contributions to ACORN, a "community organizing" group tied to Barack Hussein O'Bomber, the same group which was using that money to overthrow the election process in the United States by registering those who would vote demoscat but who were not eligible to vote, being illegal aliens, being dead, being felons, being made up names registered in many different voting precincts under different names..for the same election.

During this same period, Fannie and Freddie were contributing to political campaigns, demoscat political campaigns for the most part. Over this same period, Chris Dodd got the largest amount of political contributions from Fannie and Freddie but Barack Hussein O'Bomber got the second highest amount and he was only in the congress for 3 years and most of that time, indeed almost all that time, O'Bomber was running for president and wasn't even in Washington.

posted October 04, 2008 10:28 AM            

WASHINGTON — Unqualified home buyers were not the only ones who benefitted from Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank’s efforts to deregulate Fannie Mae throughout the 1990s.

So did Frank’s partner, a Fannie Mae executive at the forefront of the agency’s push to relax lending restrictions.

Now that Fannie Mae is at the epicenter of a financial meltdown that threatens the U.S. economy, some are raising new questions about Frank's relationship with Herb Moses, who was Fannie’s assistant director for product initiatives. Moses worked at the government-sponsored enterprise from 1991 to 1998, while Frank was on the House Banking Committee, which had jurisdiction over Fannie.

Both Frank and Moses assured the Wall Street Journal in 1992 that they took pains to avoid any conflicts of interest. Critics, however, remain skeptical.

"It’s absolutely a conflict," said Dan Gainor, vice president of the Business & Media Institute. "He was voting on Fannie Mae at a time when he was involved with a Fannie Mae executive. How is that not germane?

"If this had been his ex-wife and he was Republican, I would bet every penny I have - or at least what’s not in the stock market - that this would be considered germane," added Gainor, a T. Boone Pickens Fellow. "But everybody wants to avoid it because he’s gay. It’s the quintessential double standard."

A top GOP House aide agreed.

"C’mon, he writes housing and banking laws and his boyfriend is a top exec at a firm that stands to gain from those laws?" the aide told FOX News. "No media ever takes note? Imagine what would happen if Frank’s political affiliation was R instead of D? Imagine what the media would say if [GOP former] Chairman [Mike] Oxley’s wife or [GOP presidential nominee John] McCain’s wife was a top exec at Fannie for a decade while they wrote the nation’s housing and banking laws."

Frank’s office did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Frank met Moses in 1987, the same year he became the first openly gay member of Congress.

"I am the only member of the congressional gay spouse caucus," Moses wrote in the Washington Post in 1991. "On Capitol Hill, Barney always introduces me as his lover."

The two lived together in a Washington home until they broke up in 1998, a few months after Moses ended his seven-year tenure at Fannie Mae, where he was the assistant director of product initiatives. According to National Mortgage News, Moses "helped develop many of Fannie Mae’s affordable housing and home improvement lending programs."

Critics say such programs led to the mortgage meltdown that prompted last month’s government takeover of Fannie Mae and its financial cousin, Freddie Mac. The giant firms are blamed for spreading bad mortgages throughout the private financial sector.

Although Frank now blames Republicans for the failure of Fannie and Freddie, he spent years blocking GOP lawmakers from imposing tougher regulations on the mortgage giants. In 1991, the year Moses was hired by Fannie, the Boston Globe reported that Frank pushed the agency to loosen regulations on mortgages for two- and three-family homes, even though they were defaulting at twice and five times the rate of single homes, respectively.

Three years later, President Clinton’s Department of Housing and Urban Development tried to impose a new regulation on Fannie, but was thwarted by Frank. Clinton now blames such Democrats for planting the seeds of today’s economic crisis.

posted October 04, 2008 11:05 AM            

This is the kind of flyblown bullshiit coming off lying demoscats over the collapse of Fannie and Freddie.

So, here, we see and hear Barney Frank denying any responsibility on his part. We've already seen Queen Nancy Pee-lousi deny any demoscat responsibility whatsoever.
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/10/03/video-oreilly-rips-frank/

And here, we see what Barney Frank and a cast of other lying demoscats said in 2004 as they prevented any regulatory oversight, congressional oversight and regulatory controls being instituted over Fannie and Freddie. The problem they said was not at Fannie and Freddie but..the real problem was at a tiny government regulator and in particular, the head of that tiny agency who wrote a report detailing the problems at Fannie and Freddie.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

posted October 04, 2008 01:06 PM            

Notice the dates and years in which Bush attempted to get proper regulatory oversight on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. We already know McCain was a co-sponsor of a 2005 Senate bill to do just that. We already know there was an attempt to do so in 2004 when demoscats blamed the regulator who pointed out problems at Fannie and Freddie...instead of blaming Fannie and Freddie.

We know that at every point since 2001, republicans were trying to get regulatory controls on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and that every attempt to do so was rejected and ridiculed by demoscats.

So don't give me that non partisan bullshiiit or the utterly brain dead bullshiit that the capitalist system itself is to blame.

Typical of what grubby little socialists would say though...and have said when it's their interference in capital markets which are to blame.

White House warned about Fannie and Freddie
September 23, 2008 - 0:49 ET

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.

2001

April: 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."

2002

May: The President calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in his 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)

2003

January: Freddie Mac announces it has to restate financial results for the previous three years.

February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that "although investors perceive an implicit Federal guarantee of [GSE] obligations," "the government has provided no explicit legal backing for them." As a consequence, unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market. ("Systemic Risk: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Role of OFHEO," OFHEO Report, 2/4/03)

September: Fannie Mae discloses SEC investigation and acknowledges OFHEO's review found earnings manipulations.

September: Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact "legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises" and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.

October: Fannie Mae discloses $1.2 billion accounting error.

November: Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any "legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk." To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have "broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards" and "receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)

2004

February: The President's FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital, and called for creation of a new, world-class regulator: "The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore…should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator." (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)

February: CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to "not take [the financial market's] strength for granted." Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by "ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, "Keeping Fannie And Freddie's House In Order," Financial Times, 2/24/04)

June: Deputy Secretary of Treasury Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and called for reform, saying "We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System." (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)

2005

April: Treasury Secretary John Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying "Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America… Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system." (Secretary John W. Snow, "Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee," 4/13/05)

2007

July: Two Bear Stearns hedge funds invested in mortgage securities collapse.

August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying "first things first when it comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options." (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, The White House, 8/9/07)

September: RealtyTrac announces foreclosure filings up 243,000 in August – up 115 percent from the year before.

September: Single-family existing home sales decreases 7.5 percent from the previous month – the lowest level in nine years. Median sale price of existing homes fell six percent from the year before.

December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying "These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I've called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon." (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, The White House, 12/6/07)

2008

January: Bank of America announces it will buy Countrywide.

January: Citigroup announces mortgage portfolio lost $18.1 billion in value.

February: Assistant Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, says "A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully." (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)

March: Bear Stearns announces it will sell itself to JPMorgan Chase.

March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and "move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages." (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)

April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation and "modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)

May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further.

"Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes. Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08)
"[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their homes. And one way we can do that – and Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)
Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)
June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying "we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac." (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)

July: Congress heeds the President's call for action and passes reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.

So Blue, in July, 2008 the demoscat congress finally got off their collectivist as$es and demoscats who had previously rejected every effort to rein in Freddie and Fannie finally shut up.

But look what happened less than 2 months later.

Sunday, September 07, 2008
Government Seizes Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac
http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/government-seied-fannie-mae-freddie-mac/

posted October 04, 2008 02:37 PM            

Fact Check is part of the Annenberg Charitable Trust which gave Bill Ayers, domestic communist terrorist and Barack Hussein O'Bomber, radical Marxist Socialist about 100 million dollars with which to radicalize the Chicago public school system and Chicago school students. That was called the Chicago Annenberg Challenge.

posted October 04, 2008 03:03 PM              

In fact, Walter Annenburg had a publishing empire that he used to promote his own agendas. This is a well known fact.

Just read up on what he did to Milton Shapp candidacy for governor in the 60's when his own interest were threatened.

posted October 05, 2008 10:52 AM            

I was thinking that even Paulsen is a former democrat but now a republican. I am don't trust him yet. But I will give him the benefit of doubt. Its good that Bush has him on his admin to formulate the bailout , especially in the mess we are in right now. He was former CEO of Goldman Sachs. They employ the best in the industry. He is buddy of NJ governor Corzine(D). Both know each other from Goldman Sachs days. Property taxes (collected by states) are increasing like crazy and people are migrating out of the state because they can't afford. Corzine is saying it is good because high skilled workers will take their place.

I am thinking that its really not a great idea to be totally rational without checking with the heart at times. Therefore the Dems are a necessary evil in this country. They are doing good except that I do not believe that God asks mortgage be given to the poor That tag line has created burden ultimately on good people who pay taxes on time. But heh don't quote me - perhaps I am in a generous mood today LOL

posted October 05, 2008 12:18 PM            

What you don't want to talk about is WHY banks and other lenders wrote those loans which they knew were far more risky.

Since you don't want to talk about that acoustic, that's the perfect reason I am going to talk about it.

Even you must now be aware of the Community Development Act passed by the Carter administration and further entrenched and expanded by the Clinton administration. The Act called for MORE lending to risky borrowers in communities which were themselves risky because of unstable real estate values. These loans were mostly made in areas of what is termed "obsolete" for one reason or another. High unemployment, little business activity or local employment, homes themselves are obsolete in their design, size and structural design and/or a major corporation had already or planned to close a factory which was the focus of employment in that community. Think "Rustbelt".

O'Bomber sued Citibank for not making those risky loans to those unable to show sufficient income who lived in neighborhoods exactly as I described.

In fact, under the CDA, lenders had their arms twisted up behind their backs to make such loans which were totally outside bank lending guidelines...because of their high risk of default and foreclosure.

So acoustic, don't try to give me that nonsense that bankers..some of which were republicans...willingly participated in making those loans. These banks had a gun to their heads and were threatened with both lawsuits citing the Community Development Act and attacks on their banking charters by the Congress of the United States. Think Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Maxine Waters and the cast of far left socialists in the Congress, which now also includes Barack Hussein O'Bomber who actually did sue Citibank.

The more you talk acoustic, the more you show you don't know what you're talking about..but that's nothing new here.

zenwarner, surprise...I agree with you about Walter Annenberg..for the most part. However, what you must now realize is that Walter Annenberg is dead and there's new management at the Annenberg Charitable Trust...and the other philanthropic organizations founded under the name of Annenberg.

When Bill Ayers, domestic communist terrorist bomber submitted a proposal for a grant to fund the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, there was a lot of paperwork and documentation involved..as to how the money was to be spent, what it was to be spent on and whom was going to get the money from the grant. Bill Ayers is not an unknown quantity or quality. His role as a domestic communist terrorist bomber and leader of the Weathermen is and was no secret.

So, Annenberg made that grant in full possession of the facts about Ayers and what the money was to be spent on.

It wasn't to be spent on teaching school kids English, Math, Science and History..no, no, no. The money was slated for radicalizing the Chicago School System and teaching kids how to be good little street activists and protesters against the United States.

Now zenwarner, let me tell you about a couple of other foundations founded by conservatives which are now heavily involved on funding some of the most radical leftist Marxist causes to be found in the United States.

The Ford Foundation
The Heinz Foundation

I'm going to give you a source for these which contains a list of other private Foundations which you would immediately connect with conservatives because they bear the name of the founder. These foundations have, over the years been perverted from the principles upon which they were founded and now are involved in funding radical leftist Marxist causes.

All you need do zenwarner is go down the list of foundations and click on the link. That will take you to descriptions of those foundations and there, you can read what they are currently doing and whom they are currently funding. If you click on the names of the groups listed that the foundation is funding, you will get to read all about them as well.

So zenwarner, while your general point is well taken, let me strongly suggest that the people in whose name these Foundations were formed would object in the strongest terms possible to the way their foundations have been perverted over time and the uses to which their money is being put in the present.
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/funders.asp#private

One last thing acoustic. The US economy is not complex. The US economy is highly integrated and the one thing which interconnects with all segments of the US economy is the use of credit markets to fund virtually every facet of the US economy.

posted October 05, 2008 03:41 PM            

quote:

---

O'Bomber sued Citibank for not making those risky loans to those unable to show sufficient income who lived in neighborhoods exactly as I described.

---

No, Obama was a minor part of the group that sued Citibank for systematically denying mortgages to African-American applicants and others from minority neighborhoods. His firm won that case. If Citibank could have proved that they were making sound financial decisions, it's unlikely that Obama's crew could have succeeded.

quote:

---

So acoustic, don't try to give me that nonsense that bankers..some of which were republicans...willingly participated in making those loans.

---

They absolutely did. Offering CREDIT is one of the biggest money-makers a bank has available. We've all seen this. We all know this. It's not limited to mortgages, either. When banks set up on college campuses to target unsaavy students for high interest rate credit cards, are you actually going to try to tell me that the bank's decision-makers aren't involved? These banks have accepted credit risk with open arms.

________________________________

posted October 05, 2008 05:08 PM            

quote:

---

These banks have accepted credit risk with open arms.

---

That is a twisted observation because it essentially overlooks the implementation of the causes of the need to accept this risk. It was namely, as jwhop has brought to our attention, the federal policies endorsed by key Democrats whom have fundamentally erred through their misunderstanding of basic economic principles. The market cannot be cornered in an effort to address certain social issues that are not the source of the issues to begin with. Democrats, time and time again, keep erring with this fundamental flaw in their political philosophy.

posted October 05, 2008 11:18 PM            

Living on the edge - Aerosmith

Highway to the danger zone
--Kenny Loggins( Top Gun)

So no matter what you say they won't care.

If this was happening to a Military man fighting in Iraq or Afghanistan, I would have understood. If it happened to the voters personally, I would have understood that too. But for a questionable presidential candidate? Now that I don't understand.

posted October 05, 2008 11:46 PM            

That's the reason banks weren't keen to lend credit to prospective buyers who weren't creditworthy.

posted October 06, 2008 03:20 AM            

Yup. Banks bear some responsibility. So do the people who signed themselves into those doomed loans. But it's like a disease. You have to get to the root of the problem instead of pointing at the symptoms and only addressing those as though they don't stem from the same cause. No bandaids are going to work here, either.

Banks, before, did NOT approve loans to those who couldn't afford them. But then they were being discriminatory. They were being greedy and evil. Some politician (cough cough Carter) decides to "fix" the problem. Now banks are required, essentially, by federal decree to approve loans for people without the capital, income, credit history, etc. to afford them. Because Everyone Should Have a Home. This is to the renters what welfare still is to the poor ... another failure wrapped in good intentions and plain foolishness. It's just not enough but it sure made some people look good for a while. And rich, too. Now they get the threat of a possible a slap on the wrist, bonuses for their failed intiatives, and Dem politicians get a blank card because it's not nice to play partisan politics ... and we still get the bill. When will these "do gooders" learn? [And that's being optimistic about their lack of forethought.]

If there was any proof that the overwhelming majority of those involved were Republicans (1) the blame Bush cry would be more palatable all around and (2) no way would any libs/lefts/Dems be arguing the non-partisan way. It's only proper to be non-partisan when Dems are blaringly guilty of causing a mess.