Skip to main content

Fannie, Freddie and Democrat Hypocrisy

As hypocrite Democrat partisans hysterically peddle the gigantic steaming whopper that "Republican policies" are to blame for the mortgage-centered "financial crisis", the truth comes out (HAT TIP to HUBE @ Colossus of Rhodey) :

Let's face it....the running meme of "we need more regulation [courtesy of Democrats] to fix things and the Republicans were against regulation so they are to blame" is pure, unadulterated horse crap.

It is the denizens of the Democrat party who wanted loose housing credit on the pretext that it is better to allow lower-income people to "buy" homes they couldn't afford (and would eventually lose...along with their creditworthiness) than to have responsible lending criteria, even if this meant that, God forbid, people could not live beyond their means.

(Living beyond your means has obviously never been a concern of the government-will-fix-all-we-can-just-tax-borrow-and-spend-our-way-to-solvency deficit crowd.)

The Democrat partisan fabrication that "right-wing" or "conservative" ideological purism against government regulation precipitated the present "crisis" (or "correction", if you are a reality-based thinker) is the sort of reprehensibly-false propaganda that (barney) frankly I have become accustomed to from the frenzied irrational anti-GOP/anti-conservative/anti-McCain crowd.

I dare not give them the credit of having any detectably coherent ideology nor even ideological orientation, e.g. "liberal", "left", etc., since all they do is incessantly attack their political opponents and pump poison into the well.

To call them 'liberals' would be an injustice to real liberals who actually fit this description in good faith, rather than use it as thin cheap cover for little more than pathological attack-based partisan mania.

But I digress....


This video hit parade of congressional Democrat whores demanding not "free markets" (they so love to hate) but instead
(literally) a free-for-all would be stunning if it wasn't so typical and emblematic of the way they roll.

Sloppy special-interested
Democrat governance inevitably saddles the country with reams of ill-conceived regulations manipulated by lobbyist pimps of the industries supposedly being "regulated".

Of course these Democrat regulation-lovers are all too happy to take reams of money from these industries while "regulating" them. *wink wink*

REALITY : Centralized government regulation of private activity will never achieve what the Democrats' endless regulation mania has NEVER achieved and NEVER will : ACCOUNTABILITY.

Regulation is no proxy for accountability - a word you never hear much from those who cry for more more more centralized state regulation as the perpetual answer to every problem they themselves create.


There is such a thing as accountability without regulation - it's called the free market.

There is also such a thing as regulation without accountability - it's called Democrat party governance...statism, if you will.

In fact, I dare say that regulation is the way they ensure there is never any true accountability. When their regulatory schemes inevitably fail in a reality-based market environment the regulator/whores on Capitol Hill (along with their partisan apparatchiks and an assortment of blind fools lining up behind them) :

1. Turn around and blame those who called for less meddling and regulation by industry whores on Capitol Hill, and

2. Pose once again for the umpteenth time as beneficent government intervenors come to help with new and improved regulations...after the big bailout bonanza of course.


So is it any wonder Fannie/Freddie whores Dodd, Frank, et al are now scrambling to have the taxpayers bail out their glaring malfeasance and hodge-podge self-interested "regulatory" schemes?

Is it any wonder that the Democrats have climbed snug into bed with the now-blatantly-national-socialist Bush crowd?

Wouldn't even someone of limited intelligence be skeptical if not outright suspicious to see the Democrats siding up with the hated Bush to rush through an early Christmas present to their corporate masters?

Is it not bizarre to hear the Democrats and their echo chamber shills now whining and bleating that the Congressional GOP is resisting this socialist
scheme to bailout Wall Street...yes, the same Wall Street that the phony Democrat partisan narrative would have you believe Republicans are always so eager to accommodate?


What a nauseating combo : Bush and the Democrats. Bush takes care of his wealthy buddies and the Democrats cover up the debacle they caused, all in one fell swoop right into the pockets of present and future American taxpayers.

But then Bush has never been a conservative (and certainly no friend to the Republican Party). When it comes to government largesse and mad power-grabbing, he might as well be a Democrat.

It looks like W's parting shot is to effectively join their ranks. It seems to be a trend for disgraced Republican rejects, as kavips noted aptly.

One can hope Bush may yet find his true home with them, since they have so nicely climbed into bed together these last 2 years. Both seem more than happy to seek reward out of their blunders, mistakes and misanthropic pseudo-ideologies.

At bottom, it's the same old story we always get from the big government crowd : the answer to any of their government failures is always....more and bigger government.

This drivel is akin to "But we're not about electing only Democrats to everything. We want more and BETTER Democrats. Oh and by the way : Democrats good, Republicans evil."

Good luck with that pipe dream. If you believe such partisan nonsense, I have some mortgage-backed securities to sell you...


UPDATE : My wonderful friend and even better blogger Shirley Vandever has posted another video, equally damning. Money for Nothing indeed!

UPDATE II : Governor Mark Sanford (R-SC) puts forth some very salient observations in the Washington Post. (H/T - The Agitator).


Anonymous said…
Well done. I have been following the criminal career of Franklin Raines for some time. Democrats should insist that Obama run from this guy.
Anonymous said…
The fear-mongering and demigogery surrounding the apparent partial corporate/financial meltdown on Wall Street, coupled with grossly negligent inaction on infrastucture, sustainability and energy independence in a polluted sea of post-911 repressive legislation and concomitant loss of freedom are proof positive the so-called "major" parties and their agents are corrupt and unfit to govern the American People.

Can we trust the same unqualified politicians (and their corporate puppet masters) who created the problem in the first place to solve it by further incumbering the nation with a fool's gambling debt?. Democracy and Corporatism are incompatible, despite the lies that we have been fed by the pretenders and racketeers who seek to futher mortgage our very future.

We must look to new directions in our common defense. Ergo, greater cooperation and collaboration between Independents and Libertarians is in our long-term best national interest. Both right and left-wing ideologies have failed us, as the truth lies clearly in the objective center, supported by real-world scientific, economic and ethical principles beyond the intellectual and moral scope of the Democrat and Republican parties.

Under Bush, American capitalism has been replaced by Global corporatism -- selling us out to foreign interests -- thereby turning the once-free American People into indentured servants to our adversaries, both foreign and domestic.

The American Spirit must be renewed by a resurgence of popular will and empowerment -- not political propaganda. The road to reclaim our Liberty and Independence -- our natural birthright -- is long and hard.
Freedom, itself in in peril.

Who among us will rise to the challenge???

Wolfgang von Baumgart
State Chairman,
Independent Party of Delaware

Delaware Watch said…
I get it now. It's those poor people's fault for thinking they could live above their station as perpetual low income housing renters. And the Dems were at fault for giving them a shot at the American dream of owning a home.

Funny, though, that the mortgage crisis has fallen on the middle class and lower upper class as well.
Tyler Nixon said…
No, the poor people were suckered in and now are worse off thanks to your party's failed social engineering policies that defy and distort economic reality.

How they doin' now that you "helped" them? Do you think they're thankful to you for the predatory "affordable mortgage" they in fact couldn't afford? Now their credit's shot and they're dispossessed. You happy?

No, I blame Democrat welfarist policies that steal poor people's dreams from under them.
Anonymous said…
Well said Tyler. For a reason to act on this bailout/revitalization plan, see:

Check out the part about a silent run on banks. Uh, oh.
Anonymous said…
I'm glad you posted this piece here too, Alan. I look forward to the response to it from these free marketeer Libertarians on here.

I find it remarkable that you folks are so quick to blame the Dems, when the GOP had full control of government while this sub-prime mortgage and housing bubble was coming to full fruition. It's fair to say that both are to blame, both so easily influenced by the financial special interests that shower money on them in order to get their bidding.

Furthermore, not one word out of any of you about the responsibility and accountability of the investment bankers, brokers and realtors who perpetuated this fraud on those who should have known better but did not, or fell for it; then these frauds converted this paper into securities the value of which was unknown, while making billions and billions with world wide sales. Yes, a fraud it was!

Perhaps it is somewhat simplistic to say so, but capitalism is driven by greed, which is fine but must be counterbalanced by regulation, otherwise the result is unsustainable, as we are learning right now, again,

But back to the crisis at hand, I recommend a reading of Alan's citation. When we witness the Secretary of the Treasury on his knees begging Pelosi to get the stabilization act approved, that alone convinces me that we must act! An expectation has been created globally that we will act, therefore if we don't, confidence may well erode beyond the point of no return, in a few days!

Perry Hood
Brian Shields said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Brian Shields said…
It's everybody's fault. The bills that changed the circumstances didn't introduce themselves, they weren't voted on by themselves, and they weren't signed into law by themselves.

These law changes allowed Fannie and Freddie to buy subprime mortgages and home equity loans and massive amounts of debt, and repackage them into securities on Wall St.

They pressured banks to sell mortgages to people they knew wouldn't pay them because those banks knew they wouldn't be on the hook for them.

The banks pressured loan officers to push loans without consequences onto unsuspecting consumers.

Homeowners didn't read or fully understand the papers they signed. They didn't balance their budgets and stick to what they could afford.

Marketing and consumer conditioning pressurized homeowners to buy the latest and greatest imported gadget that they really didn't need.

Foreign investors, now swamped with US Dollars, loan it to the Fed Reserve, who then injects it into the economy in the form of sub prime loans and home equity lines of credit or have Congress spend it on Iraq.

See the cycle? It's everyone's fault.

Even me, I've been working, going to college on the GI Bill (that money came from somewhere, right?), and paying off my debts.

The only way you are not part of this is that you spent the last 10 years or so without accumulating debt of any kind, without accepting money from the government in any way.

Oh yeah.. those stimulus checks. Damn.
Anonymous said…
I wish to flesh out two comments made by Tyler: here below.

There is such a thing as accountability without regulation - it's called the free market.

There is also such a thing as regulation without accountability - it's called Democrat party governance...statism, if you will.

The first line needs the disclaimer "except when monopolistic forces are in play." Monopolies remove all accountabilities from the market.. A giant monopoly, selling a necessary product which can be obtained from no other source, can do what ever it wants... the consumer be damned. It requires a government to bust up the monopoly.

Likewise, Tyler's second line...also fails to account for monopolies. One would assume that in a free market arena, all forces would push for rapid monopolization, for that is where the money is... The problem, as our founding fathers were well aware, is that we sometimes need a strong government to protect us from ourselves...

If someone says "Hey, K, give me 10 dollars and I'll give you a C note, I will take him up on his offer and then, I will rush to my bank to withdraw $100 dollars in 10 dollar increments, hopefully to do it again.... I know that it must be illegal, I know that it must be a bubble, I know that it must be a sham, but I made 90 dollars each transaction... I'm going shopping...

Regulation is required by a society just as are criminal laws against misbehavior. If one missteps and hurts another, society says put their ass in jail... Hopefully to keep one from stepping across the line that like on a nationally televised football game, was quite visible there just a second ago.... but is not seen in the middle of all the action....

Removing the law against burglary is unheard of... Removing regulations against robbing the government of 800 billion should have, would have, could have been unheard of as well.....

(lol... my prognostic abilities foresee a long post with Steve's name at the bottom regarding this topic, for it directly seems to targets Libertarian philosophy.)
I honestly don't know if I will get the time to write it this week (damn real life for intruding on our blogging!) but if I do, I already have the title:

"kavips, Phil Gramm, and original sin"

So, yes, barring the press of time your crystal ball is still functioning. :)
Tyler Nixon said…
Interesting. Is it fair to say government is a monopolistic force, needing serious regulation? I think so. In fact we should start there before this same monopolistic force starts meddling with markets and rigging outcomes.

Most governments in this country, especially the federal, would practically shut down if they actually were forced to operate under the same regulations many are so eager to impose on private economic activity. None would get past even the imposition of the most basic fiduciary duties. Do you disagree?

And this is the entity - the monopolistic force - that you want to strictly regulate private markets? Oy vay.

Once again, regulation has its place...when it actually accomplishes ACCOUNTABILITY, rather than exist as a leaky, lurching patchwork attempt to engineer human activity.

I am glad you raised criminal laws. How is it not a crime to "rob the government", such that only regulation can address it? (This is where we get into the whole malum prohibitum versus malum per se distinction.)

Fraud is fraud. You don't need a million pages of regulations on every last move of every private entity to reach that result.

I would rather white collar prosecutions be done seriously and consistently than impose a massive universal regulatory dragnet.

I believe many fraud artists and financial pirates get away with crimes because the system views their acts as "regulatory" violations, when they are just plain theft, graft, and fraud.

Maybe Biden can come up with something in his 38th Biden Crime Bill (God help us).

This outcry for more more more regulation reminds me of the insanity of the drug war hydra and its many pernicious heads. Rather than deal with actual drug abuse/addiction (which is in reality a tiny percentage of all drug users) just criminalize all drug use and subject everyone in the land to an endless array of enforcement schemes.

Barack said it : a scalpel, not a hatchet.
Anonymous said…
Okay, maybe the Democrats hurt our economy with Fannie and Freddie. Obviously, the Republicans hurt the economy and our national security by invading Iraq. The Fed helped both sides to hurt America by giving them access to easy money.

Popular posts from this blog

Comment Rescue (?) and child-related gun violence in Delaware

In my post about the idiotic over-reaction to a New Jersey 10-year-old posing with his new squirrel rifle , Dana Garrett left me this response: One waits, apparently in vain, for you to post the annual rates of children who either shoot themselves or someone else with a gun. But then you Libertarians are notoriously ambivalent to and silent about data and facts and would rather talk abstract principles and fear monger (like the government will confiscate your guns). It doesn't require any degree of subtlety to see why you are data and fact adverse. The facts indicate we have a crisis with gun violence and accidents in the USA, and Libertarians offer nothing credible to address it. Lives, even the lives of children, get sacrificed to the fetishism of liberty. That's intellectual cowardice. OK, Dana, let's talk facts. According to the Children's Defense Fund , which is itself only querying the CDCP data base, fewer than 10 children/teens were killed per year in Delaw

With apologies to Hube: dopey WNJ comments of the week

(Well, Hube, at least I'm pulling out Facebook comments and not poaching on your preserve in the Letters.) You will all remember the case this week of the photo of the young man posing with the .22LR squirrel rifle that his Dad got him for his birthday with resulted in Family Services and the local police attempting to search his house.  The story itself is a travesty since neither the father nor the boy had done anything remotely illegal (and check out the picture for how careful the son is being not to have his finger inside the trigger guard when the photo was taken). But the incident is chiefly important for revealing in the Comments Section--within Delaware--the fact that many backers of "common sense gun laws" really do have the elimination of 2nd Amendment rights and eventual outright confiscation of all privately held firearms as their objective: Let's run that by again: Elliot Jacobson says, This instance is not a case of a father bonding with h

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and