This one is great! A sign in Alaska..
 | Pray to God that You Never Become a Targeted Individualtwg2a PitBull | June 29, 2011 at 15:56 | Categories: Communism/Marxism/Racism | URL: http://wp.me/pMJTI-WV |
From The Palouse Patriot Carolyn on March 29, 2011 in Issue #57 Shortly after we began publishing the Palouse Patriot, we received a call from a reader in Troy, ID who said the Police Chief (a woman) made a comment about turning us in to the FBI in Lewiston. Immediately, we headed for Troy [...]
 | WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress! |
Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com
HELL YEAH!!!
-------- Original Message --------
My comment: Damn Straight!
One Marine's View
We don't know how good we have it - Life is hard; it's harder if you're
stupid.
Posted: 29 Jun 2011 08:01 AM PDT
Honor
Seriously? I was finishing up cup 11 or 12 of the black nectar of the
goods coffee the other morning and gleamed over an article here about
some cry-baby kid not wanting to go to "camp" during the summer. After I
threw up a little bit in my mouth I thought Americans, especially High
Schoolers and below have no freaking idea how good we have it.
Apparently the fact that the weak ass parents of this kid that felt like
she was being "attacked" by a 9-year old is so pathetic and a true
reflection of how our milk-toast society is still nursing their kids
....for the love of God, cut them off and make them be 9 year olds...
Fk! No wonder the Chinese are laughing at America! (throws coffee cup at
random jogger)
With all of our little ankle biters becoming so obese by sitting and
feeding on crap in front of the TV, no wonder little Sally in the above
mention article didn't want to breath fresh air. Camp? Are you shitting
me? I'm in the wrong business. I should open the "Maj Pain" Camp. We
could do rowing time trials. Motivator to get a fast time? Fresh Water
Alligators in the water of course.
On a serious note, Americans and I say this including Sally's parents,
have no concept how good we have it and just how bad it can get in
America. I would Looooooooooooooooooooooooove to take any High School
graduating Seniors to Helmand Province or hell, anywhere in Afg and let
them live among the locals in some crap hole mud hut. I bet within 10
min of leaving for Afg (not even there yet) bitchin would commence about
the rumours of no TV etc. Sad. Our society is crumbling from within. We
have steely eyed Marines (17 yr olds) working their ass off seeing
firsthand how lucky we are in America. I would love to put that 17 yr
old Marine in charge of those Seniors and have him record the blood
clotting crying that would commence and yet know how to keep them alive.
There's no running water here...there's no electricity here...these
goats smell....you want me to eat that goat?.....where do I plug in my
electronics? Where is my bed?
The problem is these milk toast kids are going to be adults one day and
I hope we don't hurt their feeling when we ask them to contribute to
society. That's really cool you're a "career" student but one day you
are going to have to move out of your parents house and get a real F'ing
job. I know you will expect to make 6 figures right off the bat because
you have been in school most of your life but taaadaaa, reality of life
has just hit you, now go sweep out the restrooms and tuck in your shirt.
At first I didn't think much of it when I told people about the living
conditions of your infantry war fighter (not the ones at the gigantic
FOBs with Greenbean coffee trailers every 50 ft) I mean the fire eaters
patrolling their asses off every day in remote outposts. Then when I
explained that they live in crap holes (like horse stables-old testament
stuff) they looked sceptical and thought every Lance Corporal had their
own air conditioned trailer....hmmmm not exactly. Remote outposts are
usually bombed out buildings with no roof, animal waste everywhere you
know the basic crap hole accommodations. Yes, that's where your warriors
are calling home. Can you just imagine the young American sitting cross
legged in some hay covered floor with mice and goat shit everywhere
asking where the couch was? Well billy, you don't get couches here and
furthermore you can't go outside because Mr Sniper is waiting for you to
poke your head out and yes if you want to poop, poop in that plastic bag
we gave you when you arrived and tie a knot in the top so it doesn't
spill out. We will take it to the burn pit later tonight after we knock
off Mr Sniper.
We are soft America. I know some are going to say but "Pain" you all are
Marines you love pooping in plastic bags and being miserable, that's
what helps you be so mean. True, there is a certain freedom of pooping
outside in a plastic bag, however, we do love the opportunity to upgrade
to port-a-johns any chance we get. Nothing like hanging out in the
port-a-john with 2,000 flys underneath you in the 110 degree
temps.....it will make you see Elvis...trust me on this one.
Short of loading your local C-130 up with the class of 2011 and then
heloing them into outpost shithole, I'm not sure how to make our young
Americans appreciate what they have. If they would appreciate it,
perhaps they would take care of our America, be a contribution, stay out
of gangs etc and the like. Perhaps it starts with the Parents like in
the above mentioned article. If that mom said let me here you bitch one
more time about camp....and crushed right there, trust me, she wouldn't
have had to listen to the follow on "attacks" (I still can't read
without laughing...man were fkd) from her 9- year old.
For all of you "know it alls" 9 through whatever age doesn't go to Camp
anymore, one day is going to come where your entire life gets turned
upside down. Hopefully that's when the oh shit light will come on and
you have to make a decision. Until then, it's up to your Parents to give
you the tools you need to survive, like strong morals, integrity, a
spine and the ability for you to be a contribution to society.
Regardless of where you come from, if you think you have a free train
coming, you might want to repeat your last grade. All of those out there
who have already figured this out, look to your right and left and help
you buddy out. Life is hard; it's harder if you're stupid. John Wayne
Time for a CGar!
--
I can't believe Obama was elected. The most incompetent nincompoop
ever.....
A two year no vote Senator! A Harvard Grad. Harvard. A dumbed down PC
School.
A high grade moron can get into Harvard and graduate. It's a
government special
interest, entitlement. Just like the Mortgage fiasco. A regulation on
the banks to lend
money to people who couldn't afford to pay the mortgage. A deliberate
trashing of
the industry. Barny Fwank made it law!
The half ass Liberals, of Ass wholes (great Mascot they have there. A
Jackass
AKA, an Ass.)
They are, as Archie Bunker says to Claire Packer, a Liberal running
for City
Counsel. "You Liberals get your way, we'll all be hearing one big
FLUSH...."
How true....
I think Obama should be arrested for treason, by the very SS who
protect him....
Tried and executed. He appoints all Socialists to his cabinet! They
put in Socialist
ideals. Very subtle. And dangerous. A psychological thing.....
They are, the enemy within.....
>
> [image: WordPress]
>
> WordPress.com <http://wordpress.com/> | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
> Manage Subscriptions<http://subscribe.wordpress.com/?key=5d39acfd19218362d540a3fc3dc3315d&...>|
> Unsubscribe<http://subscribe.wordpress.com/?key=5d39acfd19218362d540a3fc3dc3315d&...>|
> Publish text, photos, music, and videos by email using our Post
> by Email <http://support.wordpress.com/post-by-email/> feature.
>
> *Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:*http://subscribe.wordpress.com
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/09/AR2008060902626.html
How HUD Mortgage Policy Fed The Crisis
Subprime Loans Labeled 'Affordable'
By Carol D. Leonnig
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
In 2004, as regulators warned that subprime lenders were
saddling borrowers with mortgages they could not afford, the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development helped fuel more of that
risky lending.
Eager to put more low-income and minority families into their own
homes, the agency required that two government-chartered mortgage
finance firms purchase far more "affordable" loans made to these
borrowers. HUD stuck with an outdated policy that allowed Freddie Mac
and Fannie Mae to count billions of dollars they invested in subprime
loans as a public good that would foster affordable housing.
Housing experts and some congressional leaders now view those
decisions as mistakes that contributed to an escalation of subprime
lending that is roiling the U.S. economy.
The agency neglected to examine whether borrowers could make
the payments on the loans that Freddie and Fannie classified as
affordable. From 2004 to 2006, the two purchased $434 billion in
securities backed by subprime loans, creating a market for more such
lending. Subprime loans are targeted toward borrowers with poor credit,
and they generally carry higher interest rates than conventional loans.
Today, 3 million to 4 million families are expected to lose their
homes to foreclosure because they cannot afford their high-interest
subprime loans. Lower-income and minority home buyers -- those who were
supposed to benefit from HUD's actions -- are falling into default at a
rate at least three times that of other borrowers.
"For HUD to be indifferent as to whether these loans were hurting
people or helping them is really an abject failure to regulate," said
Michael Barr, a University of Michigan law professor who is advising
Congress. "It was just irresponsible."
Congress is expected to vote before its Fourth of July recess
on legislation that would strip HUD of its regulatory authority over
Fannie and Freddie and give it to a stronger regulator.
Fannie and Freddie finance about 40 percent of all U.S. mortgages,
with $5.3 trillion in outstanding debt. Owned by private shareholders
but chartered by Congress, they are exempt from state and local taxes
and receive an estimated $6.5 billion-a-year federal subsidy because
they can borrow money more cheaply than other investors. In return, they
are expected to serve "public purposes," including helping to make
home buying more affordable.
HUD officials dispute allegations that the agency encouraged
abusive lending and sloppy underwriting standards that became the
hallmark of the subprime industry. Spokesman Brian Sullivan said the
agency and Congress wanted to increase homeownership among underserved
families and could not have predicted that subprime lending would
dominate the market so quickly.
"Congress and HUD policy folks were trying to do a good thing," he said,
"and it worked."
Since HUD became their regulator in 1992, Fannie and Freddie each
year are supposed to buy a portion of "affordable" mortgages made
to underserved borrowers. Every four years, HUD reviews the goals to
adapt to market changes.
In 1995, President Bill Clinton's HUD agreed to let Fannie and
Freddie get affordable-housing credit for buying subprime securities
that included loans to low-income borrowers. The idea was that
subprime lending benefited many borrowers who did not qualify for
conventional loans. HUD expected that Freddie and Fannie would impose
their high lending standards on subprime lenders.
Banks typically back prime loans with customers' deposits. But subprime
lenders often rely on money from Wall Street investors , who buy
packages of loans as investments called mortgage-backed securities.
In 2000, as HUD revisited its affordable-housing goals, the
housing market had shifted. With escalating home prices, subprime loans
were more popular. Consumer advocates warned that lenders were
trapping borrowers with low "teaser" interest rates and ignoring
borrowers' qualifications.
HUD restricted Freddie and Fannie, saying it would not credit them
for loans they purchased that had abusively high costs or that were
granted without regard to the borrower's ability to repay. Freddie and
Fannie adopted policies not to buy some high-cost loans.
That year, Freddie bought $18.6 billion in subprime loans; Fannie did
not disclose its number.
In 2001, HUD researchers warned of high foreclosure rates among subprime
loans.
"Given the very high concentration of these loans in low-income
and African American neighborhoods, the growth in subprime lending
and resulting very high levels of foreclosure is a real cause for
concern," an agency report said.
But by 2004, when HUD next revised the goals, Freddie and
Fannie's purchases of subprime-backed securities had risen tenfold.
Foreclosure rates also were rising.
That year, President Bush's HUD ratcheted up the main
affordable-housing goal over the next four years, from 50 percent to 56
percent. John C. Weicher, then an assistant HUD secretary, said the
institutions lagged behind even the private market and "must do more."
For Wall Street, high profits could be made from securities backed
by subprime loans. Fannie and Freddie targeted the least-risky
loans. Still, their purchases provided more cash for a larger subprime
market.
"That was a huge, huge mistake," said Patricia McCoy, who
teaches securities law at the University of Connecticut. "That just
pumped more capital into a very unregulated market that has turned out
to be a disaster."
In 2003, the two bought $81 billion in subprime securities. In
2004, they purchased $175 billion -- 44 percent of the market. In 2005,
they bought $169 billion, or 33 percent. In 2006, they cut back to
$90 billion, or 20 percent. Generally, Freddie purchased more than
Fannie and relied more heavily on the securities to meet goals.
"The market knew we needed those loans," said Sharon McHale,
a spokeswoman for Freddie Mac. The higher goals "forced us to go into
that market to serve the targeted populations that HUD wanted us to
serve," she said.
But because Fannie and Freddie were buying mortgage-backed
securities rather than the actual subprime loans, their involvement came
too late to require stiffer standards from lenders.
Fannie and Freddie "made no progress in civilizing the market," said
Sandra Fostek, a senior regulator at HUD.
William C. Apgar Jr., who was an assistant HUD secretary under
Clinton, said he regrets allowing the companies to count subprime
securities as affordable.
"It was a mistake," he said. "In hindsight, I would have done it
differently."
Allen Fishbein, who was Apgar's adviser at HUD and is now at
the Consumer Federation of America, said the agency failed to use
its regulatory power by refusing to credit Fannie and Freddie for loans
that were "contrary to good lending practices."
"They chose not to put the brakes on this dangerous lending when they
could have," Fishbein said.
Fostek said the agency had no practical way to comb through the tens
of millions of individual loans contained in the subprime securities.
She said that Fannie and Freddie did not overwhelmingly rely
on securities to meet the goals but added that she would not disclose
the amount counted because it is considered proprietary.
Fannie and Freddie spokespeople say their partners had agreed not
to sell them loans with several prohibited characteristics,
including credit insurance, excessively high costs and prepayment
penalties that lasted longer than three years. But experts say the
volume of subprime foreclosures proves they were toxic to borrowers.
Judith Kennedy, president of the National Association of
Affordable Housing Lenders, said that while Fannie and Freddie nurtured
unregulated subprime lenders, an estimated 30 percent of subprime
borrowers could have qualified for safe, lower-cost prime loans.
"The damage to homeowners, to neighborhoods, to state and
local governments as the tax base erodes, and now to all American
taxpayers, is almost incalculable," she said.
Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), a member of the Senate banking committee who
brokered some of the regulatory reform in the pending bill, said HUD's
homeownership push ignored reality.
"We need to focus on putting families in homes they can truly
afford, not just on getting a sale, packaging the loan into a
sophisticated financial security and walking away to the next closing,"
he said. "Today, people are wondering, 'Why weren't the regulators and
the industry probing these [loans] more deeply?' "
Staff researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.
--
Warm Regards
DOC
___________________ ~ ~
(_____(*)___________} } }
 | Assploding Hypocricy: Two Days After Scolding Congress for work habits, Bam heads to Presidential Retreat for Holiday WeekendScotty Starnes | July 1, 2011 at 1:35 PM | Tags: Camp David, Obama vacation, President Obama, slacker-in-chief | Categories: Political Issues | URL: http://wp.me/pvnFC-5ya |
That's the Obama pattern. Say one thing, do the exact opposite. It's the "do as I say, not as I do" routine he is famous for. This is our slacker-in-chief.
Washington—President Barack Obama will be taking a break for the Independence Day holiday weekend.
All those fundraisers and traveling on the taxpayer's dime sure is tiresome.
He'll travel to Camp David in western Maryland Friday afternoon, following some morning meetings.
Morning meeting? Translation: A few rounds of golf.
Daughter Malia has a holiday birthday. She'll turn 13 on Monday.
Wanna bet Bam skips Malia's birthday to play golf?
| | WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress! |
Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com
 | EnvironMENTALists in Government Plan to Save the Spotted Owl by Killing Off Native Barred Owlsdoctorbulldog | 1 July, 2011 at 10:17 am | Categories: Environ-mental-ism | URL: http://wp.me/p1NPg-7e1 |
Yeah... Isn't that just like an environMENTAList? Euthanize the competition.
Gov't Announces New Way to Protect Spotted Owls: Kill Their Competition
July 1, 2011 by Jonathon M. Seidl - The Blaze
The northern spotted owl is a beautiful bird. It's also threatened under the Endangered Species Act. And now, the government is taking drastic measures to ensure it's survival by advocating the "removal" of the bird's major competition, while also seemingly targeting loggers.
"Removal" of the birds is really just another way to say shooting the barred owl, the spotted owl's rival. And it's part of a group of recommendations announced by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to help revitalize the spotted owl population:
Management of the encroaching barred owl to reduce harm to spotted owls. Most of the recovery actions the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has carried out since finalizing the spotted owl's 2008 recovery plan deal with the barred owl threat. A major part of this is developing a proposal for experimental removal of barred owls in certain areas to see what effect that would have on spotted owls, and then to evaluate whether or not broad scale removal should be considered. This portion of the 2008 plan was not significantly revised.
The Seattle Weekly explains how "removal" has worked in the past:
Though the USFWS policy hasn't officially been released yet, The Oregonian reports that it's likely to include a strategy to kill off between 1,200 and 1,500 barred owls from northern California through Oregon and Washington.
Killing off invasive species is a common practice in wildlife management, but barred owls aren't invasive–they're native. And several environmental groups are arguing that killing them won't help the problem unless people are prepared to shoot the owls by the thousands every single year.
One biologist estimates the cost of such a plan to be $1 million annually.
Plus, by seemingly all accounts, the barred owl is simply a stronger and better-adapted species. It eats a wider variety of food and nests in a wider variety of places than the spotted owl.
While the wisdom behind killing one species to save another is part of the debate, there's also controversy surrounding another aspect of the recommendations — protecting the spotted owl's habitat. But there's just one problem: that conflicts with local logging. Read more of this post
| | WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress! |
Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com
| | Treasury Secretary/Tax-cheat Timothy Geithner informs Obama he may resign after debt negotiation dealScotty Starnes | July 1, 2011 at 11:50 AM | Tags: economics, President Obama, Timothy Geithner, Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner, unemployment | Categories: Political Issues | URL: http://wp.me/pvnFC-5xT |
Now why would the guy who sat and watched the biggest addition of debt in U.S. history pile up want to quit?
From WaPo:
Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner, an architect of the Obama administration's economic strategy, has told the president that he may seek as soon as this summer to resign, according to people familiar with the matter.
Economic strategy? Spending, through redistribution of wealth, is the only strategy these Keynesian worshippers understand.
Geithner's departure would mark the loss of Obama's longest-serving economic adviser at a time when the recovery has slowed and the unemployment rate remains stubbornly high.
Geithner is the only original member of Obama's failed economic team. The same team that predicted below 8% unemployment if Obama's $830 billion stimulus was passed. America is still waiting for this "recovery" that never happened.
Geithner has told the White House he will wait until the conclusion of talks with Congress over the nation's debt before deciding whether to leave, according to the people familiar with the matter.
An administration official said Geithner recognizes the conclusion of these negotiations could provide a "window" for him to leave. Another official at the Treasury Department said Geithner doesn't plan to make any decisions while he is focused on striking a deal with lawmakers to reduce the deficit and raise the federal limit on borrowing, which he has said must happen by Aug. 2 to avert a catastrophic default.
These two officials spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were discussing Geithner's private deliberations.
When asked about his career plans late Thursday, Geithner said at a conference in Chicago that "I'm going to be doing this for the foreseeable future."
But he acknowledged that family concerns were weighing on him. Geithner said his family was moving back to New York, where his son would finish high school. Geithner said he would commute to Washington.
"I've never had a real job," Geithner told his interviewer, former president Bill Clinton. "I've only worked in public service. I live for this work."
This is the problem with many that Obama has selected to ruin the economy. Like Obama, most have no real world experience and have only been parasite upon the taxpayers.
| | WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress! |
Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com
