Reply With Quote
She probably thinks Fannie and Freddie are people.
Maybe McCain can lend her that Alan Greenspan book.http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/51940.html
McCain's running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, speaking in Colorado Springs, Colo., said Fannie and Freddie had "gotten too big and too expensive to the taxpayers." The companies, however, aren't taxpayer funded but operate as private companies. The takeover may result in a taxpayer bailout during reorganization.
She probably thinks Fannie and Freddie are people.
Don't forget that dangerous anti-intellectualism is one of the things repugs respect most in a candidate. I'd guess the more she s up and the more clueless she is about the world, the more she'll appeal to the back-asswards white-trash that makes up the repug base. Because after all, what kind of bourgeoisie socialist actually wants someone who's intellectually elite (or even halfways smart) to be in charge?
She's just like me! She must be qualified to be a heartbeat away from the presidency.
This is a question for the economic/political gurus on the board:
If Freddie and Fannie are being taken over by the government, how is that not "socialist" governing, something the Republicans accuse the Democratic candidates of favoring?
Being taken over by the government lmfao.
They were taken over by the government a long ing time ago.
Both parties are to blame. We are not even pawns, no point in getting mad or acting like anything will change.
It's not like she thought there were 57 states or anything.
It is something that HAS to be done...if not, home prices would fall through the floor. This move isn't made to help the 10-15% of the morons who took out 700K loans when they make 40K a year. It is made to save the people that aren't getting foreclosed on from seeing their home values be half of what they were two years ago.
The "affordable housing" the dems pushed for has really brought true greatness to this once great nation.
It's funny how they are ok with privatizing profits and socializing risk/loss for these housing companies, yet want to do the opposite for oil companies.
You can't even say "let the companies fall anymore, b/c the government lets them get in so deep they will bring every single bank with them LOL. Someone is getting PAID.
What the ever. Capitalism and the "free-hand" just failed. Unfortunately the government decided to prop it back up by re-distributing your tax dollars.
IMO, home prices should fall through the floor and nobody should be saved. Bring on the third world in America- I'm all for it. If we want to be unbridled, unen bered, capitalists then we damn sure should have to live with it's terrible consequences when it goes down the tubes.
Last edited by balli; 09-08-2008 at 02:23 PM.
I understand that its something that has to be done. I want it to be done for the good of the economy. But what I dont understand is if conservatives believe in a free market, why don't they let the market fix it. This is an honest question.
Isn't a type of socialism when the government intervenes and assumes control of companies that were once private? I know those companies were already largely subsidized with fed. money, but how is this not considered anathema to staunch conservatives? Do they only favor government intervention when absolutely necessary?
And was it the free market and loose regulations that got us into the housing crunch the first place?
These aren't rhetorical questions. I really don't know, so thats why I'm asking.
Clearly, Obama knows that there are not 57 states, and clearly, it was just a momentary slip of the tounge.
Clearly, Palin doesn't know what the she's talking about, and clearly, her statement indicates as much.
How is that clear?
^at you still trying to peddle that weak "57 states" as a counterargument.
If it's not clear to you why, clearly, you don't know anything about Fannie and Freddie either.
You assume conservatives are cool with the idiots we have in office? It's simple, you have ty worthless republicans in office and not fiscal conservatives.
Dems pushing for affordable housing for their worthless voters and these housing companies saying OK! knowing the government would just bail them out once hit the fan.
The truth is, you will never have true conservatives back in office because there is too much money to be made in that filth.
But since you and your ilk voted them in, why should we now trust you about McCain? Your past judgment has proven to be flawed by your own admission in the above statement.
Ok gotcha. Now how is McCain any different?
He's not any different, but he's better than Obama and those who want to turn us into full fledged socialists. Or communists if you're like ballijuana.
It's not a hard concept.
If you're smart enough, you can still make a good living off the big evil businesses.
From what I've read, Obama doesn't advocate a communist economy. What about his economic proposals lead you to believe that?
This has nothing to do with Democrats wanting people to be able to afford houses. It has everything to do with huge mortgage companies and their prediatory lending practices. Don't even try to put the selfishness of non-fixed rate loans on Democrats.
What I don't see as clear is how one statement can clearly indicate that she "doesn't know what the she's talking about."
They can only prey on the stupid.
But because America is all about group-think, everyone gets to take a hit.
Ah, the old communists card- the last refuge of a moron when all his arguments have been shot down; nevermind reality, just scream communist.
Do yourself a favor and go get a political ideology book.
And you planning on answering the question about your judgment when it comes to the last "idiot republican" administration you voted for?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
