Where is the White House outrage over bonuses at Fannie, Freddie?

Originally posted by macman
No, there has not been a post with a statement of "Well, I am Pro Obama.........."

The idea that a person(s) will respond with "Well, Bush started it" speaks volumes.

And an OP that blames Obama and leaves out the fact that Bush started it also speaks volumes.

But, is Obama in charge or not?
Is he President or not?
Did he promise transparent Govt or not?

Obama is as much to blame as the people during the Bush era.
But, he is to blame more due to the fact he allows it to continue.
This is not difficult to understand.

I have yet to see any post defending Obama. He is as much to blame. Like I said the problem isn't Bush or Obama but the way the OP is presented.

Well,this might be a reason why most people see it for what it is. Bush Obama,makes no difference,unless you start pointing the finger at the guy signing the checks.You know,he doesn't have to accept it......

This works both ways baby........

Rage? I just took four Zanex, two Rhohypinol, and six Prozac. How could I have any rage??????

No company should be giving out such large bonuses or any really when they are receiving a bail out, haven't paid it back in full and certainly not asking for another.

Originally posted by beezzer
Yes I can. Obama is POTUS. He's actually the boss now. He has been able to change any bloody policy he's wanted to for the past three years.

The POTUS has only so much power. Anything he tries to do can be counter-acted by the other branches of the government.
So to do anything he has to convince them not to kill it on sight, which they have tried to do to everything he has suggested. (I'm not saying he's had nothing but good ideas, just he has faced some serious opposition.)
The only reason he got stuff done in the first place was that the Dems had enough power to counteract the GOPs attempts. Now that he does doesn't have that power support, it's getting hard for him to do anything. And since most of the nation blames him and wants him out, the Dems are now trying to distance themselves from him.

Originally posted by Ark005

Originally posted by beezzer
Yes I can. Obama is POTUS. He's actually the boss now. He has been able to change any bloody policy he's wanted to for the past three years.

The POTUS has only so much power. Anything he tries to do can be counter-acted by the other branches of the government.
So to do anything he has to convince them not to kill it on sight, which they have tried to do to everything he has suggested. (I'm not saying he's had nothing but good ideas, just he has faced some serious opposition.)
The only reason he got stuff done in the first place was that the Dems had enough power to counteract the GOPs attempts. Now that he does doesn't have that power support, it's getting hard for him to do anything. And since most of the nation blames him and wants him out, the Dems are now trying to distance themselves from him.

What resistance has he had from first taking office to last year?

Please enlighten us.

Originally posted by daskakik

Originally posted by macman
No, there has not been a post with a statement of "Well, I am Pro Obama.........."

The idea that a person(s) will respond with "Well, Bush started it" speaks volumes.

And an OP that blames Obama and leaves out the fact that Bush started it also speaks volumes.

But, is Obama in charge or not?
Is he President or not?
Did he promise transparent Govt or not?

Obama is as much to blame as the people during the Bush era.
But, he is to blame more due to the fact he allows it to continue.
This is not difficult to understand.

I have yet to see any post defending Obama. He is as much to blame. Like I said the problem isn't Bush or Obama but the way the OP is presented.

edit on 3-11-2011 by daskakik because: (no reason given)

Not really, as he did not state that Bush is innocent of any wrong doings.
The premise is that Obama continues the BS, while he talks bad on past Administrations.

Obama is the world biggest Joke and Scam.

A week or two ago there was an interview on NPR with one of the old heads of some government lending branch who was working when the government decided to back all of these loans.

He went on to say that people knew it was a bad idea at the time but politics won over common sense and he expected government to be out of the lending business altogether within the next 15-20 years putting it all back into the private sector if for no other reason than the charade was unsustainable.

I'll see if I can dig up his name on the NPR site.

Can't find it yet but found a lot about shutting Freddie and Fannie down.
I do recall this guy being interviewed mentioned Clinton specifically several times.

reply to post by macman


But it conveniently omitted that he is also to blame. We're not children we know a political piece when we see one and we can tell which way it's spinning. That is part of denying ignorance.

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by macman

 

But it conveniently omitted that he is also to blame. We're not children we know a political piece when we see one and we can tell which way it's spinning. That is part of denying ignorance.

Not really, given that Neo has stated before he thought Bush was bad.
I never knew that Everything had to be included in things of this nature.
But, back to the topic at hand, Obama and HIS continuance of this crap.
What say you?

reply to post by macman


Neo can say whatever he wants but he has made it clear that he is here to push his agenda.

What I find telling is how saying something that is true, like that Bush initiated these bailouts, gets twisted into someone defending Obama. Looks like a double standard to me. The OP leaves out a rather pertinent detail and it's no biggie but someone calls him on it and suddenly this guy is an Obama apologist.

What do I think of Obama's silence? I'm not surprised. Everyone knows that the real power is with those that have the wealth. What their puppets say and do is just a puppet show to keep the kids entertained.

reply to post by intrepid


No he wasn't, but Obama did start the policy of backstopping Fannie and Freddy debt without limit.

They have since been bleeding money left and right. They also own 95% of all new mortgage origination.
www.nytimes.com...

Despite their central roles in the housing bubble, the Federal Housing Administration, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac now back more than 95 percent of new mortgages. In 2006, at the height of the housing boom, the F.H.A.’s share of the mortgage market was 2 percent; today it’s around 30 percent. Given that the agency’s requirements on down payments and creditworthiness have been less stringent than Fannie Mae’s, that should concern all taxpayers.

The fact is, the Obama administration is being mum on this because he doesn't want to bring attention to the fact that his policy of propping up two massively failing government run enterprises was simply feeding the executives pockets with tax payer money.

You can try to deflect this away from the Obama admin all you want. But that would be the only dishonesty here. Considering that the Obama admin is knee deep in it.

Here is the simple Truth:

We have had corporate controlled Presidents for quite a long time. Every time one showed up that refused to be controlled he was shot. This entire mess has NOTHING to do with Bush or Obama. It has to do with the money.
It always has and it always will.

You want to fight instead of just running your mouths? Don't file your taxes this year. Have the cash to pay but don't file. Make them come to you and ask for the cash. Under the Fifth Amendment you are not required to give the Government anything that can be used against you in a Court of Law. When you sign your tax return you do so under penalty of perjury. Seems like a document that can be used against you to me!

So sick of all the whiny #$#%^ losers out there that bitch and whine but every tax day they file. Yeah your are a rebel.