|

Barney Frank also guilty of lying about Fannie and Freddie

The Securities and Exchange Commission filed civil fraud charges in federal court on Friday in New York City against six former top executives at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, accusing them of misleading the government and taxpayers about risky subprime mortgages the mortgage companies held during the housing crisis.

According to the lawsuit, Fannie told investors in 2007 that it had roughly $4.8 billion worth of subprime loans on its books. The SEC says that Fannie actually had about $43 billion worth of products targeted to borrowers with subprime credit.

Freddie said about 11 percent of its single-family loans were subprime in 2007. The SEC says it was closer to about 18 percent.

So far, the companies have cost taxpayers almost $154 billion – the largest bailout of the financial crisis. The companies could cost up to $259 billion, according to its government regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Administration.

The inspector general for the FHFA said the top six executives at Fannie and Freddie received a combined $35.4 million in 2009 and 2010, while the companies were in federal receivership. The government is used to paying for incompetence!

If lying about the status of Fannie and Freddie are the charges against the executives of the companies, where are the charges against Barney Frank? Frank was at minimum an incompetent, or at worst, a fraudulent government official, who also lied about the status of the mortagage companies while pressuring banks to give loans to those who didn’t qualify, and that makes him just as guilty as the company’s officials of covering up the facts.

For years Congressional reformers tried to improve the oversight of Fannie and Freddie to prevent the government-chartered companies from putting the housing market and the whole economy at risk.

The takeover of Fannie and Freddie probably could have been prevented had Frank not worked to stop every attempt to limit the risks taken on by the two government sponsored mortgage companies.

In 2002, shortly before accounting irregularities were exposed at both companies, Frank said, “I do not regard Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as problems,” The Wall Street Journal reported. After the Freddie Mac accounting scandal in 2003, Frank said, “I do not think we are facing any kind of a crisis.”

In fact, Barney Frank made matters worse by pushing Fannie and Freddie to take on greater risk. Frank wanted more loans to people who might not qualify for traditional bank financing. And, as The Wall Street Journal has pointed out, Frank “pressured regulators to ease up on their capital requirements — which have now meant that the taxpayers had to make up that capital shortfall.”

Share:

50 Comments

  1. Carol Foster

    One minute it’s the OMA is why elected persons are having the wool pulled over their eyes because it’s too difficult to see how professionals running the show can hid the real figures, and now it’s all Barny Frank’s fault Fannie & Freddie lied about their true problems.

    Looks like only Conservatives are being lied to effectively and have a get out of jail free pass in their hip pockets, while Democrats should have known better and should be in jail.

    Really, you need to leave more than 24 hours between the flip flopping on where you stand in matters.

    • Ted Biondo

      I didn’t flip flop Carol. I said that people with experience, and Barney Frank has got more enough of that, are certainly aware of what is happening and Barney tried to cover it up for years.

  2. XXX Barney should be in jail. He is the reason millions of people got loans they couldn’t afford and obviously have never paid back. The rest of us suffer with a housing market that is destroyed.

    Sorry Juice, I edited the adjectives for Barney – let’s stick with the issues, please!

  3. NAVYFLYER10

    Ted, you are dead right on this. Barney and Chris Dodd are more responsible for this dismal economy than all the other culprits in mind. Isn’t it amazing that both of them decide not to run for re-election at about the same time? Both should be investigated, prosecuted and, if found guilty, fined and sent to jail.

    Of course, your buddy Cunningham will think that they are two of the greatest elected officals ever because they are like him. But both of us know that the next knowledgeable and intelligent thought that comes out of Cunnigham will be his first.

  4. The next question should be this: What did Freddie and Fannie get for making then-Sen. B. Hussein Obama their #2 campaign fund recipient, as totalled over a 10-year period of contributions (even though Obama was only in the Senate for THREE YEARS).

    FYI, John Kerry was #1.

  5. Sadly Ted, Chris “The Waitress Sandwich” Dodd and Barney “XXX” Frank can’t be held liable by the SEC since this has to do with fraudlent staements made in SEC filings.

    As NavyFlyer puts it, Dodd and Frank are as responsible for the 2008-09 recession as any one individual can be on the planet. I would add, that the root cause of this whole recession can be traced back to the Clinton administration as this article illustrates.

    http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/30/business/fannie-mae-eases-credit-to-aid-mortgage-lending.html

    Sorry Terry, I removed the remarks about Barney Frank. We should stick with the issues.

  6. Snuss’ referring to Obama as “B. Hussein” is merely infantile but Terry’s gay-bashing term for Barney Frank should have been edited out. Allowing it in your blog is condoning it and should be beneath you Ted.

    • Ted Biondo

      Azguy – Apparently you missed the comment I made to Juice at 5:00 PM tonight. I removed the XXX from the comment and stated that I had edited the adjectives for Barney Frank. I don’t see every comment, as they all go buy on all my posts at once. I don’t just get comments from one post at a time. I don’t always go back and check each and every one of them, sorry. Besides, once approval has been given, the comments no longer wait for my approval. I removed the comments on Terry’s comment.

      Don’t always “assume”, Azguy – you know what that does, right?

  7. JRM_CommonSense

    Ted at al., Could you please send links to the sources that substantiate your claims that Mr. Frank was gjuilty of lying about Fannie and Freddie. All I see is your conjecture which would never standf up in a Congressional investigation or in a Court of Law. Or is this just another one of those one-liners that the extremes (both left and right) have decided to use to scare people rather than discussion and actual facts to prove rtheir case. I sure hope I don’t don’t see links to youtube an d/or weaselzippers as reliable sources. Remember, I am looking for facts, not speculation. If you cannot present the facts, then stop playing games.

  8. Azguy is more concerned about how I spell Obama’s name, than the fact that he was #2 on the Fannie/Freddie contribution list, as a freshman Senator.

  9. JRM_CommonSense

    Snuss, I think you need to read the material that you referred us to above. My reading shows that Mr. Franks was reacting to the financial reports that were presented to Congress by the management of Fannie andf Freddie. Those reports stated the financial conditions of the companies as reported by its management. If you are making the assumption that Mr. Franks had other information that the public didn’t have then you would be correct. However, there is nothing in the documents that says that or indicates that. Just like anyone else, Mr. Franks can only respond to what official reports state.

    Stop presenting the headlines without reading the supporting material. Or is this just another instance of the modern day extreme postion holders refusal to read facts correctly malady?

  10. JRM, I think you need to read the material Snuss referred us to above.

    “Judicial Watch uncovered documents last year proving that members of Congress, including — and perhaps especially — Barney Frank, were well aware that Fannie and Freddie were in deep trouble due to corruption and incompetence and yet they did nothing to stop it.”

    Maybe if YOU say it then it’s true?

  11. Brothel Barney (he did have a gay brothel being run out of DC townhouse) used his Congressional powers with Fannie in 1991. Brothel Barney further wanted to keep “rolling the dice” on Fannie and Freddie as the house of cards was getting higher and higher. He fought proposed regulations presented by the Bush Administration in 2003.

    He is as guilty as any one individual involved

  12. JRM_CommonSense

    Sam I did read the documents. They were essentially the reports from Fannie and Freddie stating that they were in good shape. Their management signed off on the reports and they are the public record. Tell me how Mr. Frank and others in government would know anything different than that.

  13. Carol Foster

    I see, Ted, you encourage name calling because you’ve allowed it to remain posted.

  14. Carol – it’s a fact that he had a brothel being run out of his DC townhouse. You can look it up.

    • Ted Biondo

      Terry and Carol – It remained in Terry’s post because there was a brothel reported in Mr. Franks apartment in hundreds of newspapers and blogs – look it up as Terry suggested.

  15. Carol, I did look it up and a 10 month investigation by the House Ethics Committee found that Rep. Frank was not aware of what had taken place. The most outspoken person calling for Frank’s ouster from congress was Larry Craig of Idaho, remember him? That information comes from Time magazine. But what is surprising to me is that terms like “waitress sandwich” and “brothel Barney” are acceptable to this blog. Maybe the RRStar should use a ratings system for the blogs. This one should be a PG-13 at least.

  16. If the term “waitress sandwich” is disturbing to you, perhaps you should place the blame where it belongs-with those who forced that poor woman into that situation, Democrats Ted Kennedy and Chris Dodd.

    As to Barney Frank, I find the statement that he “didn’t know” what was happening in his apartment laughable.

    SNuss, I’m not going to let this blog turn into a sordid expose’. Please stick with the facts in the post which was about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and how Barney Frank was involved with the coverup which is now leading to civil lawsuits against the CEO’s of the respective companies. It was not about Senator Frank’s sexual preference. The reference to what happened in the town house is fact but even that is not relevent to the debate. Please stick with the topic.Ted

  17. Adam Faber

    Ted, the fact that something is reported in hundreds of newspapers and blogs does not actually make it true. Roughly 22 years later, we know that Frank’s roommate, boyfriend or whatever-he-was was running a prostitution ring from Frank’s residence. That is, Steve Gobie was part of a prostitution business while living with Frank, but as far as we know, the actual sex acts took place elsewhere. This does not meet the definition of brothel, which is where patrons engage in sexual activity. Thus, the term “Brothel Barney” is inaccurate.

  18. Carol Foster

    Thanks for looking it up, Azguy, I appreciate it.

    If the House Ethics Committee is Gringrich’s get out of jail free card, Ted, I have to wonder why that same Committee’s findings for Frank is ignored by you?

    Your column and you set the tone for it. Setting the bar so low only means you approve of a double standard. Since you invited others to read what was said about Frank, than you also must have known the outcome of that Committee’s findings.

  19. Adam Faber

    Ted, in editing Snuss’s post said: “The reference to what happened in the town house is fact…”.

    Ted, I hope that you’re not, again, referring to the notion that Frank’s home was used as a brothel. As I’ve already pointed out, that is far from established fact. While an occupant of that house was involved in organized prostitution, that does not mean that any prostitution actually occurred on premises.

    Please, also, be careful with the term “sexual preference”. That suggests a degree of voluntary choice and current consensus among scholars is that sexual orientation is not a choice.

    I agree that Snuss and everyone should stay on topic but you, too, should stick to the facts and not advocate the myth that Frank was running a brothel in his house. There are many things to dislike about him, so why not dislike him for things that are actually true?

    • Ted Biondo

      You can never satisfy a liberal like Adam unless you think exactly like them. There is obviously no way to meet them halfway and no reason to placate them. I need to coin a phrase that specifies what liberals do. They call us tea baggers, etc. etc. What’s a good synonym that denotes a liberal’s way of thinking and acting besides redistributers, socialist, fair sharers, antisuccessers, antirichers, classophobes, etc.? Keep it clean.

  20. Adam Faber

    I would say a good phrase for me would be “a stickler for facts and accurate argumentation”.

    Ted, this speaks to your character. Instead of admitting that you’re propagating a myth (that Frank ran a brothel in his house), you have called for a public name-calling session against me. I shall not stoop to your level, but I will continue to point out your inaccuracies.

  21. Ted, one description that I find appropriate is “MoonBat”, described as.

    An unthinking or insane leftist — in other words, most modern leftists.

    Per the Urban Dictionary.

    Also:

    Barking moonbat: Someone on the extreme edge of whatever their -ism happens to be.

    (coined by Perry de Havilland)

    “Definition of a ‘barking moonbat’: someone who sacrifices sanity for the sake of consistency”
    -Adriana Cronin

    Although the term (often rendered simply as ‘Moonbat’) is very popular with conservative and libertarian bloggers who appropriately use it to describe the Chomskyite Left, it was always intended as a much more ecumenical epithet and has been correctly used to describe certain paleo-conservative and paleo-libertarians views. (also see idiotarian).

    Contrary to some speculation and entries on Wikipedia, Perry de Havilland has stated it was was not originally a play on the last name of George Monbiot, a columnist for The Guardian, as he was using the term long before he met or had even heard of Mr. Monbiot.

  22. In the spirit of the season, check this site for an ” Occupy Christmas” poem:

    http://thepeoplescube.com/peoples-blog/twas-an-occupy-christmas-t8155.html

  23. JRM_CommonSense

    So, I guess we all know how to call names now, but we never did finish the discussion about who knew what, when, and how in relation to the lying Fannie and Freddie executives who signed off and published false financial reports to the public and the government oversight committees. Anyone who wants to know the answer should read the documents that the Judicial Watch presented as the proof for their inaccruate telling of the tale.

  24. Adam Faber

    Snuss, pardon me while I do not use Urban Dictionary but instead continue to use an actual dictionary so I can use words properly to convey a message in an accurate, literate and factual manner. I suggest that Terry and Ted use a dictionary to look up the word brothel. Had they done so, they would have known that that was the incorrect word to describe the sex business operations in Barney Frank’s home.

    Now that Ted has quite plainly called for this to be a forum for name-calling and has encouraged a complete suspension of decorum, will he do away with the misleading description at the top of this page that says this is a “[f]act-based discussions of local, state and national issues”?

  25. Carol Foster

    Well, it looks like the fact based discussions of local, state and national issues have been traded in for common place name calling that comes complete with a new dictionary being suggested as a source to accomodate some who have used the same old names for so long and so often they need a new supply.

    I’m glad Terry and SNuss belong to you, Ted, and you have my condolences in the matter. You’ve asked they don’t call names and yet they continue. Nothing worse then out of control bad behavior by those who really think it supports your way of doing things.

    I don’t think Adam wants you to placate him because he’s a liberal. He would just like, as would so many of us, that your “fact based” statement meet what you write. Not asking much along with you don’t allow name calling rather then usually ignoring it.

  26. Adam Faber

    I would further pose this question to Ted: how is it liberal of me that I want words, “brothel” in this instance, to be used with their conventional definitions as published in dictionaries and columns and discussions to be based on facts rather than hyperbole and personal animus? Ted’s affirmation of Terry’s assertion that there was a brothel in Frank’s house is unsubstantiated by facts.

    Liberals do not own honesty; many conservatives are honest, too, but we wouldn’t know it from reading what Ted writes here.

  27. IF you really believe that Barney Frank had no knowledge of a brothel being run from his townhouse then either Barney is not the most observant person around or you are the most gullible to take him at his word.

    Actually Ted, I have a word that would be like Tea Bagger, that is, with a sexual overtone like Tea Bagger, but you wouldn’t like it.

  28. As CommonSense wants to get back to Fannie and Freddie. Here is a great article that shows the ties between Countrywide and Fannie and Freddie that started back in the 90’s.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204791104577110643650732030.html

    This was nothing but the Left’s move to push unqualified borrowers into houses they couldn’t afford with Fannie and Freddie acting as the safety net with the implied support from the Federal Gov’t.

    Carol,

    I know Ted and SNuss and I beling in the same group – conservatives – we think, liberal feel.

  29. Adam Faber

    Terry called Frank “Brothel Barney”. When questioned on that, Ted deemed that permissible because “there was a brothel reported in Mr. Franks apartment in hundreds of newspapers and blogs – look it up as Terry suggested”. In essence, Ted deemed that an acceptable name to call Frank because he thought it was true that there was a brothel in his house. However, a brothel is, by definition, a place where patrons go to have sex in exchange for money. Since there’s no evidence that the sex was actually taking place at Frank’s house but was merely arranged by Frank’s boarder, there was no brothel at his house. Whether he knew about the prostitution or not is not germane to that as Terry would try to have us believe to change the subject. The word “brothel” is well defined and Ted and Terry do not get to rewrite dictionaries. Therefore, “Brothel Barney” is an inappropriate name to call Frank because it is not supported by the facts.

  30. Your belief in Barney Frank’s character strains credulity, IMHO.

    Yes, Carol, we both know how polite and tolerant you of the Left are. For examples, look here: http://startthinkingright.wordpress.com/2009/04/29/3301/

    @JRM: “These new documents show that liberals in Congress were reckless when it came to the massive taxpayer liabilities related to Fannie Mae and Fannie Mac,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Government officials at FHFA repeatedly sounded the alarm regarding fraud, abuse and corruption at these two GSEs while liberals in Congress, led by Barney Frank, blocked attempts to address the situation in a meaningful way.”

    Read the rest at: https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/new-documents-uncovered-judicial-watch-show-congress-ignored-corruption-fannie-mae-and/

    • Ted Biondo

      Thanks SNuss, great answer. Many conveniently forget things that happened in the past, when it doesn’t serve their purpose. I know people were all over Barney Frank concerning Fannie and Freddie on this topic and Judicial Watch is a good source for rebuttle.

  31. Carol Foster

    Thanks for the read Terry.
    I don’t see where Barney Frank new that Freddie or Fannie were lying about the figures they presented?
    I do see abuse by those agencies along with Countrywide.
    Don’t we all understand government programs are abused? Don’t we all ask over and over again how can be stop abuse? This ranges from Grants to Food Stamps along with Social Security & Medicare. Some say the Farm Substadies should be placed in that group.
    Trying to place more Americans into a program so they can buy a home isn’t the bad guy. We should all be able to agree homeownership improves lives as well as neighborhoods. The VA program proved helping vetrans buy homes with that dollar down worked well.
    The abuse of the program is unacceptable and you don’t have to be a member of any political party to say it should have never happened.
    It took a good many people all with the goal of fraud so they could earn bonuses they didn’t deserve to make this happen for a very long time.
    The one fact that’s obvious is they all lied when asked, and presented in writing those lies, so setting the blame on Barney Frank as causing the bubble & downfall of the housing market isn’t even rational.
    It’s even bad politics.

  32. Carol Foster

    Terry
    Thanks for noting Democrats “feel” it’s what makes us more than computers and able to understand how what we do effects others around us. I personally think Conservatives “feel” as well judging from the response to the Speaker of the Houses actions in returning for a vote today. I doubt all the emails and phone calls gotten from Americans who were unhappy over the Speaker’s stand on this extension of the Social Security & unemployment benefits were all from one side of the political fense.
    I’m looking forward to see what cuts will be proposed as payment by Conservatives to continue through the entire year as the President originally asked be done. Both sides want to see rational cuts. Now lets see if your side can do that one simple thing or if they will continue to offend a good many Americans by being stumbling blocks to what the general consensus of the American people have clearly said what they want which is a combination of cuts in spending and closing loopholes in taxes and a fairer tax rate for all concerned.
    Not all the difficult to accomplish if you can “feel” the pain the American People are expressing and work toward the common goal rather then only “thinking” of the next election.

  33. Carol, you can “feel” all you want-with your own money. Unfortunately, Leftist “feelings” have financial consequences that the productive members of society are forced to finance. That can’t continue. Our debt now exceeds the GDP of the Country. We can’t afford any more of your feelings.

  34. JRM_CommonSense

    Countrywide acted like it did because it wanted to make lots of money. It was basically an unregulated company that paid mortgage brokers large commissions on the mortgages they sold, charged higher fees to minorities in granting them mortgages (fees that added to Countrywide’s profits), and knew that Fannie and Freddie would cover them. They scammed the system because they knew they could do it and make a lot of money doing it. Countrywide, Fannie, and Freddie operated on the premise that the housing market would continue its massive value increase and everything would be alright.

    They reported their financials as acceptable and continued to do so even when the housing market started to collapse. These financial reports were approved by the management of those companies and would only be found to be incorrect when outside auditors would have an opportunity to evaluate the statements against reality. If you cook the books, you can get away with it for a period of time. Eventually, you will get caught or in trouble.

    To make the assumption that any government official would be able to know that these companies are cooking the books, or that the government official is complicit in the book cooking is really far fetched. But this approach to political discource is the rule of the day. Most people who represent the extremes of the left or the right find it impossible to accept the fact that they may be even slightly wrong about anything. So they have to make the assumption that the other side is as intransigent as they are and take the attack dog approach to discourse, whcih often ends in name calling, not meaningful discussion.

  35. However, you CAN make the assumption that if that company (Countrywide) is giving sweetheart deals to a politician (Chris Dodd), that politician isn’t going to look very hard for any financial irregulaties, and might ignore them, or cover them up, even if he saw them.

  36. Carol Foster

    Are only Democrats getting Social Security checks, food stamps, grants, VA loans and the like, SNuss?
    I wasn’t aware only Conservatives worked for a living. Is that something in the Constitution I missed?
    There are certainly consequences to financial mistakes but programs aren’t always mistakes. You call them this when times get tough. I find it an odd concept to accept the tax money paid for years into the system, but in difficult times tell those in need of programs they can’t be afforded. Treating them as if their citizenship has been suddenly revoked.
    Your problem is you have no plan and can’t imagine living with difficulities for more than a possible six months, maybe?
    When you figure out more than the Conservatives work and pay into the system let us know. And when you get all the Conservatives who benefit from Government checks monthly to give them up, than you can have the high ground in your little game of Leftist only spend while Conservatives are , well, what can I say, but perfact!

  37. JRM_CommonSense

    A person who is closed minded and thinks that they have all the answers “CAN make the assumptions” that they find necessary to continue the charade that they want to continue, or put responsibilities on people who do not have those responsibilities. Since I don’t make those kinds of assumptions, only the one who has made them about shows themselves to be the inappropriate part of the assumption.

  38. JRM_CommonSense

    The best source would be to read the actual documents that were attached to “interpretations” of what those documents said. The major concerns are with the way Fannie and Freddie apply GAAP in their accounting practices and how they have made agrteements with the Federsal Housing Agencies to correct any shortcomings that have been found. As long as the some posters refuse to read the actual documents they will continue to espouse the false positions and bullet point inuendoes that the document “interpreters” are hoping they will believe. It’s like watching a movie that you don’t like and deciding that the book it was based on was a terrivble book. Those who do nothing but let others provide them with the meaning of things that they don’t read are doomed. Kind of like the people who applied for mortgages, having the mortgage broker (who will get a compssion on the granting of the mortgage) tell them that they could afford a $400,000 house with an annual income of $40,000 but forgetting to mention the higher fees they would pay and the 7% boost in the mortgage rate after 2 years. Had they taken the time to read the actual mortgage documents, they would have realized that they were headed for trouble.

    Read the actual document, not just the biased Cliff Notes. That may have worked in High School and Community College, but this is the real world.

  39. Carol, I stated “productive members of society”. SOME Democrats do qualify.

    BTW, the Obama payroll tax cut slashes funding for Social Security. Don’t you see that as a problem?

  40. Carol Foster

    No, I don’t think the Social Security give back is a good idea. Where it’s easy to give something like this, it’s far more difficult to get people to be willing to give it back to the government at a later date. That’s just human nature.

    What’s worse is hooking the unemployment onto this thing along with the pipeline deal.

    I personally favor each item stands alone to be passed or not passed.

    Dealing with money, especially in hard times, is like tip-toeing through the tulips. Missteps are obvious and difficult to repair the damages.

    And by the way, when you name “Leftists” you are excluding them as being “productive.” That’s why how we spend is politics with you and not really how we spend the money. We need to tax on higher incomes all year for Social Security. We need to get people to have their wishes in writing about their final days of medical care for Medicare to make substantial savings since we already know that’s exaxtly where so much of the costs happen. And we don’t ask which political party anyone belongs to so these two things can happen.

    Take a ten dollar bill out of your wallet and ask it which party it belongs to and let me know when you get an answer? That’s how you treat financial problems if you expect to get good results. Non political.

    And if you took JRM’s advice about reading the documents you might discover real ways to find solutions concerning Fannie & Freddie etc. rather than the non solutions presented of Barney Frank did it.

  41. Carol, the problem is this: Far-Leftists believe that ALL of our hard-earned money belongs to the government, and THEY decide what we are “allowed” to keep.

    As to Barney Frank, et al: You can’ t fix the problem until you identify AND correct the SOURCE!

  42. JRM_CommonSense

    And I have to borrow and slightly alter an earlier comment made ny tTED.

    “You can never satisfy” an extremist conservative” unless you think exactly like them. There is obviously no way to meet them halfway”. A change I will make is that we should still try to reach some kind of compromise even though it is hard to placate them. And this is equally true of extremist liberals.

    I will not ask anyone to come up with any more names to call each other because the name calling creates even further separation. As has been demonstrated so many times over the last few years. What seems to be lost in all the rancor is a belief that as a country we can only really succeed together. If that is truely what has happened, then we are really headed down a long dark road.

    • Ted Biondo

      JRM_CommonSense, it may surprise you, but I agree that we can only succeed working together. However, everyone has to pull their own weight – at least what they are able to. We can’t allow the other guy do everything in order to get a free ride. Everyone has to do what they can. But it can’t be, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need (or needs) – the slogan stated by Karl Marx in his 1875.

      Some people will rise to a higher level than others, we must realize that and be satisfied with the level we attain and not hate those who do better but help those who do worse, but free to chose how much help we will provide, not let the government decide for us!

  43. JRM_CommonSense

    No Ted, it does not surprise me that you agree that we can only succeeed by working together. You are a very bright man. What surprises me is that sometimes you get caught up in some of the ranting that defines both the left and right extremes. That approach defines today’s approach to political discourse and government operation, and is a barrier to getting anything done. To believe that the mess we are in is the fault of one side or the other is a completely unsupportable position. History shows us that both the extremes and the middle are responsible over time. Continually pointing fingers, gets nothing done. Waiting for one side or the other to have the majority to ram through their ideology, gets nothing done. Continually trying to make sure that everyone knows that the other guys are the bogey men and the reason for our problems, gets nothing done. Ideology versus practicality, gets nothing done. If you need proof of these statements, look where we are today. Nothing gets done because we are not focusing on practical solutions to problems. We are focusing on ideological positions. How effective would that approach be in your personal, every day life? I know that my 65 years of life have been filled with situation after situation where compromise and practicality continually bumped against ideology whether in work or in play. That life would have been very miserable had I chosen ideology over practicality in most of those situations. Had I done that, I would probably not have been able to retire at 62 and enjoy the fruits of my labor. I find very few people that I know who give a crap about what Karl Marx said in 1875 or believe that the “government” is deciding that this is what has to be done. I find the majority of people I know believe this ideological tenet: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”. However, thay also know from a practical postion, that for lots of people, life sucks! Is it their fault? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. But that is the way life is, and then you die. Life is to short to get nothing done. We all need to put on our “big boy” and “big girl” pants, suck it up, and do what needs to be done from a proctical point of view to make lives productive and liveable.; not destructive and vindictive. Merry Christmas!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CAPTCHA

*