The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

Not At My Table - Political Discussions => National & International Politics => Topic started by: guido911 on May 05, 2010, 05:38:57 PM

Title: Freddie Mac Need Another $10.6 Billion
Post by: guido911 on May 05, 2010, 05:38:57 PM
I am beginning to think this will never end.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100505/ap_on_bi_ge/us_earns_freddie_mac_1
Title: Re: Freddie Mac Need Another $10.6 Billion
Post by: YoungTulsan on May 05, 2010, 07:10:48 PM
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_m05JL1MFTQo/SJ0C1zKgjhI/AAAAAAAAAA4/9DvmLYeC7Zg/s400/tree+fiddy.jpg)

(http://www.angelfire.com/mi4/crescentfresh/treefiddy.gif)

I just given him treefiddy the week before

What?! You gave that monster another damn treefiddy?!

He tricked me

Well no wonder the damn monster keeps coming back to our house! You keep giving it treefiddy!


Tree fiddy 10 Billion
Title: Re: Freddie Mac Need Another $10.6 Billion
Post by: Hoss on May 05, 2010, 09:22:48 PM
Quote from: YoungTulsan on May 05, 2010, 07:10:48 PM
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_m05JL1MFTQo/SJ0C1zKgjhI/AAAAAAAAAA4/9DvmLYeC7Zg/s400/tree+fiddy.jpg)

(http://www.angelfire.com/mi4/crescentfresh/treefiddy.gif)

I just given him treefiddy the week before

What?! You gave that monster another damn treefiddy?!

He tricked me

Well no wonder the damn monster keeps coming back to our house! You keep giving it treefiddy!


Tree fiddy 10 Billion

Awesome South Park reference...

"It's a g*ddamn succubus!"...
Title: Re: Freddie Mac Need Another $10.6 Billion
Post by: Gaspar on May 10, 2010, 08:00:41 AM
Non news item. . .   

The ministry of information has forbidden coverage on the major networks.

The near half-billion no-bid contract Obama just gave to Halliburton is also off limits too.

Please refrain from speaking of these on the forums.

Thank you.
Title: Re: Freddie Mac Need Another $10.6 Billion
Post by: Cats Cats Cats on May 10, 2010, 08:11:08 AM
If Bush were still President he wouldn't give Freddie Mac any government aid.
Title: Re: Freddie Mac Need Another $10.6 Billion
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 10, 2010, 01:21:35 PM
Probably not.  He gave a trillion to the bankers, but not 10 billion to mortgage holders.

Halliburton - well at this pace (half billion at a time) Obama will have given them about half what Bush/Cheneyh gave them in about another 15 to 20 years!  Good thing he will be long gone by then!




Title: Re: Freddie Mac Need Another $10.6 Billion
Post by: nathanm on May 11, 2010, 02:38:32 PM
So are these real mortgage losses hitting now, or are we still in the "making Fannie and Freddie take much larger loss provisions than commercial banks, thereby crapping all over their balance sheets" mode? (Really, it's more the commercial banks that are underprovisioning, not Fannie and Freddie overprovisioning)
Title: Re: Freddie Mac Need Another $10.6 Billion
Post by: we vs us on May 11, 2010, 03:27:25 PM
Quote from: nathanm on May 11, 2010, 02:38:32 PM
So are these real mortgage losses hitting now, or are we still in the "making Fannie and Freddie take much larger loss provisions than commercial banks, thereby crapping all over their balance sheets" mode? (Really, it's more the commercial banks that are underprovisioning, not Fannie and Freddie overprovisioning)

Can we not talk about how complicated the underlying economics of the situation are?  They really get in the way of my unmitigated fury at all things government related.
Title: Re: Freddie Mac Need Another $10.6 Billion
Post by: nathanm on May 11, 2010, 03:43:46 PM
Quote from: we vs us on May 11, 2010, 03:27:25 PM
Can we not talk about how complicated the underlying economics of the situation are?  They really get in the way of my unmitigated fury at all things government related.
Sorry, the double standard gets in the way of my outrage.  ;D
Title: Re: Freddie Mac Need Another $10.6 Billion
Post by: Conan71 on May 11, 2010, 03:45:21 PM
Quote from: we vs us on May 11, 2010, 03:27:25 PM
Can we not talk about how complicated the underlying economics of the situation are?  They really get in the way of my unmitigated fury at all things government related.


Aw, come now!  It's nothing more complicated than stupid people buying things they didn't need with money they didn't have, at payback rates they could never afford.

Resume your anger now...are you sure you are okay today?  That "unmitigated fury at all things government related" sounded like something I'd say.
Title: Re: Freddie Mac Need Another $10.6 Billion
Post by: nathanm on May 11, 2010, 03:58:09 PM
Quote from: Conan71 on May 11, 2010, 03:45:21 PM
Aw, come now!  It's nothing more complicated than stupid people buying things they didn't need with money they didn't have, at payback rates they could never afford.
Yeah, the unemployment rate has nothing to do with people's ability to service debt.
Title: Re: Freddie Mac Need Another $10.6 Billion
Post by: Conan71 on May 11, 2010, 04:21:09 PM
Quote from: nathanm on May 11, 2010, 03:58:09 PM
Yeah, the unemployment rate has nothing to do with people's ability to service debt.

Has something to do with companies not being able to service debt in many cases.
Title: Re: Freddie Mac Need Another $10.6 Billion
Post by: we vs us on May 11, 2010, 10:52:04 PM
Quote from: Conan71 on May 11, 2010, 03:45:21 PM

Resume your anger now...are you sure you are okay today?  That "unmitigated fury at all things government related" sounded like something I'd say.

You know, you're right.  I was down at Veteran Park this weekend for a run and I think I might've stepped in a puddle of left over Tea Party from a couple of months back.
Title: Re: Freddie Mac Need Another $10.6 Billion
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 12, 2010, 08:03:35 PM
Enlightenment ensued today on tea party related item - especially as relates to the tea baggers.  Had a young kid at work explain what 'tea-bagging' is...
I think I will have to stop using the term.

Or not.

Title: Re: Freddie Mac Need Another $10.6 Billion
Post by: we vs us on May 13, 2010, 09:33:20 AM
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on May 12, 2010, 08:03:35 PM
Enlightenment ensued today on tea party related item - especially as relates to the tea baggers.  Had a young kid at work explain what 'tea-bagging' is...
I think I will have to stop using the term.

Or not.



You're a little late to the game on this one.  This has been a source of pride/derision for the home/away team for months now. 

Some of us, however, have known what the term REALLY meant since about 2004.
Title: Re: Freddie Mac Need Another $10.6 Billion
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 13, 2010, 12:13:30 PM
Well, what can I say.  I'm old now.  Can't keep up with the latest fads and slang.
Prince Albert is another one.

Title: Re: Freddie Mac Need Another $10.6 Billion
Post by: Conan71 on May 13, 2010, 12:29:53 PM
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on May 13, 2010, 12:13:30 PM
Well, what can I say.  I'm old now.  Can't keep up with the latest fads and slang.
Prince Albert is another one.



(http://www.freakingnews.com/pictures/32500/Prince-Albert-Gore--32820.jpg)
Title: Re: Freddie Mac Need Another $10.6 Billion
Post by: we vs us on May 13, 2010, 01:19:04 PM
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on May 13, 2010, 12:13:30 PM
Well, what can I say.  I'm old now.  Can't keep up with the latest fads and slang.
Prince Albert is another one.



New Rule:  when naming your insurgent political movement, do a quick search of urbandictionary.com before sending out your first mail blitz.
Title: Re: Freddie Mac Need Another $10.6 Billion
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 13, 2010, 10:10:42 PM
I didn't name them.  They named themselves and I just took it on faith they would pick the appropriate term.  And they did.

That's Prince Al.  Different thing.  Not sure which would be the most painful, though.




Title: Re: Freddie Mac Need Another $10.6 Billion
Post by: we vs us on May 13, 2010, 11:14:07 PM
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on May 13, 2010, 10:10:42 PM
I didn't name them.  They named themselves and I just took it on faith they would pick the appropriate term.  And they did.

That's Prince Al.  Different thing.  Not sure which would be the most painful, though.






Not you.  The Royal "you."  You know, like, anyone.   Guido, for instance.
Title: Re: Freddie Mac Need Another $10.6 Billion
Post by: guido911 on May 14, 2010, 08:51:21 AM
Quote from: we vs us on May 13, 2010, 01:19:04 PM
New Rule:  when naming your insurgent political movement, do a quick search of urbandictionary.com before sending out your first mail blitz.

Let's call them the "law-abiding illegals". How about that genius?
Title: Re: Freddie Mac Need Another $10.6 Billion
Post by: we vs us on May 14, 2010, 10:35:23 AM
Quote from: guido911 on May 14, 2010, 08:51:21 AM
Let's call them the "law-abiding illegals". How about that genius?

Is that what we're calling the Tea Party now?
Title: Re: Freddie Mac Need Another $10.6 Billion
Post by: nathanm on May 14, 2010, 05:37:05 PM
Quote from: we vs us on May 13, 2010, 11:14:07 PM
The Royal "you."
I'm a much bigger fan of the royal we. It's always nice to take credit for something "we" did. ;)
Title: Re: Freddie Mac Need Another $10.6 Billion
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 17, 2010, 10:46:58 PM
Let's just skip all the shared royal stuff (you, we, etc).
Let's just go to the royal ME!!!

Elect me to be Supreme Commander!!

Oh, wait...did I say that out loud??