Government -Sponsored Enterprises....or Government Leader Sponsorers?

In 1938 (during the Great Depression) congress created the Federal National Mortgage Association to provide more money for loans to low-income people. Fannie Mae was created from the FNMA, which separated from the government, went public, and appeared on the New York Stock Exchange in 1970. However, there is still some affiliation with the government in the form of tax exemption, low capital requirements, and better interest rates. Out of the 18-member board of directors, five are appointed by the President of the United States.

Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are always connected, and basically do the same thing. Freddie Mac was created by congress in 1970, and went public in 978. Freddie Mac still enjoys the same government-sponsored short-cuts Fannie Mae enjoys. Both of them are considered "government-sponsored enterprises," meaning they are privately owned, but receive support from the government. They are also a monopoly, as their government affiliation allows them to sell notes and securities at a lower price than any competitors.

The whole purpose of these two companies is to buy mortgages from other lenders and they compile all those mortgages into a portfolio or mortgage-backed securities that they can resell to the public. The idea is to draw people to invest in the mortgage market, which then brings more money to lend out for more mortgages.

As mentioned before, they are government sponsored enterprises (GSE's), so they shouldn't be allowed to sponsor a political candidate. But they did. They were smart. They chose the right candidate. Their candidate is now president.

I'm not suggesting some wild, Steven Spielberg-type-of-plot government conspiracy. Nor am I suggesting that we oust Obama from the White House because of some shady sponsor. BUT, I think it is somewhat suspicious that less than one month after his election, his shady sponsors are receiving 200 million more each.

But don't call me a senseless blonde yet.

I comprehend that Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae have an icy grip on the US economy. It would be silly to let them crash. I agree with Obama's choice on this, and would have done the same thing.

Then again, it was silly to let those GSE's continue when some wise people could tell that they could bring on an economic crisis.

Wise people like....hmmm....maybe like John McCain in 2005.

We can make a difference.

Hope

Irony

I would really love to shake Barrack Obama's hand right now. He gave a very, very, good speech this morning at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington DC. He spoke about religion, about how different they are etc. I know this is about religion, but somehow it struck me as incredibly ironic when he said
"There is no God who condones taking the life of an innocent human being. This much we know."
Here is a quote from his website, www.barackobama.com, which states his stand on abortion:

Barack Obama understands that abortion is a divisive issue, and respects those who disagree with him. However, he has been a consistent champion of reproductive choice and will make preserving women's rights under Roe v. Wade a priority as President. He opposes any constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court's decision in that case.

Just to prove that I didn't manipulate this statement in any way, you can read it yourself here. Scroll down.

So, to condense this down, he is a "consisitent champion of reproductive choice," but, as a Christian, he doesn't believe that God "condones taking the life of an innocent human being." Maybe, Mr. Obama, you should coordinate what your website designer and your speechwriter say.

Here is a video to prove it. He says that priceless line around 1:32.



Note: I will always support Obama as my president. I simply enjoy pairing two of his quotes for further analysis.
We can make a difference
Hope