Thanks be to God! The House of Representatives just killed HR 3997, defeating the bill 226 Nays to 207 in favor. Democrats voted 141 in favor and 9 opposed, while Republicans voted 65 in favor and 133 opposed. Members debated the merits and consequences of the bill all morning before taking a final vote around 1:30. A simple majority of 218 was needed to either pass or kill the bill. It is unknown at this time when further talks about a government bailout will resume.

Though the votes were not strictly along party lines, many of the floor speeches were. Rep Ron Paul spoke out passionately against the bill, reasserting the points he has been making for the last several years regarding the Fed over-manipulating the economy and creating artificial conditions that were unsustainable and damaging to the dollar, concluding that passage of this bill will do far worse damage in the long term. Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) earlier referred to the bill as a “crap sandwich” but implored his colleagues to vote in favor.

Maxine Waters rambled on about Martin Luther King and poor disadvantaged inner city folks, and George Bush and Republicans. Waters also loudly proclaimed her unwavering support for this bill while waving her pocket Constitution in the air. Someone should reminder her and her colleagues to actually READ that Constitution sometime. Someone should also remind Ms. Waters that she forgot to mention Dick Cheney and Halliburton – we all know they are the ones responsible for this debacle. They were probably the ones who really killed all those “deals” Dodd and Pelosi kept announcing over the weekend. Perhaps Ms. Waters could hold hearings on the matter? 

Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) had a bunch of things to say, but no one could understand him.

My favorite remarks came from Charlie Rangel (D-NY) blamed Bush and lamented over the poor who will not be able to buy a house. Then he asked, “Where are all the small –government conservatives today?” Well Congressman, apparently 227 of them were present.

It is somewhat comforting when conservatives find their backbone and stave off the advent of socialism in the United States for another day. Thanks be to God.

You may want to read Part I , Part II , and Part III prior to reading this, as this is a multipart series.

Part IV

A Government Sponsored Culture of Corruption

Freddie and Fannie took on increasing amounts of high-risk debt because they could do it with impunity: they are backed up with an implied guarantee from the government, so for them high-risk is really no risk at all – even if the loans go into default, Fred and Fan will be OK because they know the government will throw lots of money at them. Why? Because they own more than one half of the mortgage debt in the US. So they, and the government, encourage privately owned financial institutions to get on board the high-risk-high-profit gravy train and they also begin assuming high-risk debt. Banks and holding companies begin to consolidate and merge – money is flowing all around, the economy is humming right along and the Dow hits record highs. Unfortunately for the rest of us, many of those companies and individuals who were raking in the money were doing so because of what would otherwise have been considered unethical business practices had government not been promoting it.   An atmosphere of corruption facilitated and even encouraged by the government is only going to breed more corruption. 

Housing was more in demand than ever, so… the price of housing goes up, and up, and up. The demand is still there, so when the opportunity presents itself to make even more money, people and institutions will do it. Given the fact that the government was at least tacitly blessing these questionable activities, if not outright threatening regulatory enforcement if companies refused to participate, many people were taken advantage of by such relatively new inventions as so-called Ninja loans (No Income, No Job and no Assets) where said loans were made when there was really no probability that it would ever be paid back. Granted, one would think that when pursuing a loan for a home that one would have adequately assessed one’s financial standing and come up with a line in the sand that was an absolute limit, knowing they could afford nothing more. You can’t argue with ignorance or sheer stupidity. 

If people are too stupid to understand what they can or cannot afford, there’s not much one can do to help. A substantial part of the problem here, and certainly a part that only served to feed the beast and make matters even worse is the “credit culture” that practically puts having as many credit cards as you want in the Bill of Rights and very bad regulations that allow banks and financial institutions to give credit cards to an unemployed homeless guy with leprosy and dementia, and then encourage him to seek even more credit. 

Credit cards are great, right? You only have to make the minimum payment each month and you can spend as much as you want – and, the more you spend the bigger your credit line seems to get. Let the reader understand that I am not making excuses, but simply relating a contributing factor. When you go into a broker and sit down to get pre-approved to buy a home and you have determined that your absolute maximum price you can afford is $200,000 you have given this a fair amount of thought. Then the broker sifting through your paperwork tells you that your assets show that you can really afford a $285,000 home. And then you start thinking about the one you saw last week that you thought was out of your price range and reconsider – and buy it. Eventually you realize too late that the broker was wrong and you were right in the first place. You default, the bank takes the house and turns around and sells it and continues to make money – that is until people stop buying houses. Then the whole bubble bursts and the ugly truth rears its head. And that is what happened leading up to the collapse of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

Let me reiterate once more: I am not advocating excuses for any people who knowingly overextended themselves and ended up in foreclosure sitting under mounds of debt that they could not pay off. Fiscal responsibility is an individual responsibility, and most of us understand and adhere to it. Unfortunately there has been a general attitude of entitlement in this country for a long enough period of time that many people simply think that having credit so they can get stuff they know they cannot afford is a Constitutional right. And, it doesn’t help matters when the government steps in and acts as if this were so, creating a regulatory structure that not only encourages but forces banks and financial institutions to make loans to people it otherwise wouldn’t because of quotas and threats of enforcement of anti-discrimination statues, etc.

The people on Wall Street and those who administer the financial markets of this country are not stupid. If someone with no job, no assets, no income, and no way of ever paying off a loan can to them and asked for a loan to buy a nice house in the suburbs, under normal circumstances the banks would have turned them down flat. But the government stepped in and said, in effect, “you have to give them a loan because they deserve a home and a line of credit, and if you refuse we will have to audit your business practices.” In the beginning, the banks weren’t given a choice. In the end, they succumbed to greed as they apparently could no longer resist the temptation to get themselves in deeper and deeper, issuing more bogus loans and justifying it by the “collateral” supposedly backing up those loans. But, the wealth of the companies was measured in terms of the “pledged collateral” and assets backing up those loans, so on paper they were rolling in money. In reality they were being bled dry.

To say that the bursting of the mortgage bubble caught some off-guard is completely and utterly moronic, because common sense ought to dictate that when you make a loan to someone with no assets, job, or income, you will not be getting that money back anytime soon. The people who were making the decisions at these institutions are not by any means stupid: they knew full well what they were dealing with and what they were doing. They knew exactly the risks they were taking, and believed the potential for profit was worth the risk. And they were wrong. And they were warned many, many times.

Some people, however, apparently did see the eventual bursting of the bubble. In fact, the Bush Administration proposed some sweeping overhauls back in 2003. In a New York Times article dated Sept. 11, 2003 the Times reported that, “Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.” This was seen as “is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken.”

Furthermore, then Treasury Secretary Snow said that “Congress should eliminate the power of the president to appoint directors to the companies, a sign that the administration is less concerned about the perks of patronage than it is about the potential political problems associated with any new difficulties arising at the companies.”

However, “The administration's proposal, which was endorsed in large part today by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, would not repeal the significant government subsidies granted to the two companies. And it does not alter the implicit guarantee that Washington will bail the companies out if they run into financial difficulty; that perception enables them to issue debt at significantly lower rates than their competitors. Nor would it remove the companies' exemptions from taxes and antifraud provisions of federal securities laws.”

So, even though people in the know were openly acknowledging a very major problem and preparing somewhat for the inevitable downturn that they had to know would lead to a financial collapse, there was still little incentive to alter the prevailing practice of the day when both companies were exempted from antifraud provisions of federal securities laws. The result? No changes, just more debt. Freddie and Fannie continued to accrue debt and sell it to other firms, all of which were now totally on board the high-risk mortgage gravy train.

Not everyone saw a problem with this, however: “’These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,’ said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ‘The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.’'' You see, to some politicians, most of them progressive Democrats, pandering to a voting bloc is more important than the financial stability of the nation.

So for the far-left progressives who are in denial that their precious pandering policies are about to ruin the nation financially, and continue to blast the current President and any conservative thinker who would dare to question the validity of the standard progressive, or for that matter Congressional, solution of throwing as much money as possible at problems, might I inquire as to who you think will be paying for this? The progressive left blames the free market, but the real problem is that the market is not free and hasn’t been for decades due to government meddling in things it has no business meddling in. And now it owns businesses – and a ton of debt. That means YOU own a ton of debt, and you and your posterity will be responsible for paying it off because, despite its assertions to the contrary amidst the clatter printing presses running overtime in the basement of the Fed, you know and understand if you have read some of my previous articles on the subject of the government and its debt, that the Federal Government is flat broke. It has no money, and only keeps running because the Treasury auctions off that debt to the entity – or country – bidding to charge us the lowest interest rate.

This brings me to a final point. Remember that $2.3 trillion dollar figure we were discussing a while back?   Well, that seems to have changed too. Recently the Fed printed out another $180 billion to pool with other central banks from around the world and pump into the global economy. Congress will likely will approve the recommendations of Fed chief Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Paulson and authorize close to $1 trillion for a new government agency and program to by up all the bad debt in the country. It’s amazing how fast things can happen in Washington when those responsible for it realize that the proverbial you-know-what has hit the fan and splatter all over their vile and corrupt faces. You may also factor in the very real possibility of Congress approving even more that the $1 trillion figure requested so it can bail out homeowners. There will also be more industry bailouts, because now that the government kitty has been tapped, there will be no end to the number of industries holding out their hands for money.

Finally, as if the news could not get any worse, consider that a certain far-left progressive who would be President will tack on an additional 800 billion to 1 trillion dollars to these figures with new government programs. 

It is time to act sensibly here and do something about this mess before we totally implode. 

What can we do about it? For starters bombard your representatives with angry email. Flood their accounts. Flood their phone banks. If you scare them they will react, because for the most part, they are cowards. Then in early November ask yourself this question before you go to the polls: “If two quasi-government agencies and a bunch of corrupt, rotten and unaccountable politicians got us into this mess, how will the same people and more government get us out?” Then vote.

You may want to read Part I and Part II prior to reading this, as this is a multipart series.

Part III

An Economic Bermuda Triangle

Those who are to blame for this crisis are the ones who engaged in predatory lending practices and those who enabled them to do so. Who would that be? Let’s start at Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and then skip on over the Capitol Hill and the White House.

Who’s been working over at Freddie and Fannie? Funny you should ask that. According to the Investors Business Daily, when “Franklin Delano Raines took the helm in 1999 at Fannie Mae, for example, he used it as his personal piggy bank, looting it for a total of almost $100 million in compensation by the time he left in early 2005 under an ethical cloud. Other Clinton cronies, including Janet Reno aide Jamie Gorelick, padded their pockets to the tune of another $75 million. Raines was accused of overstating earnings and shifting losses so he and other senior executives could earn big bonuses. In the end, Fannie had to pay a record $400 million civil fine for SEC and other violations, while also agreeing as part of a settlement to make changes in its accounting procedures and ways of managing risk.” Hey – isn’t that the same Jaime Gorelick who was on the 9/11 Commission? And isn’t that Franklin Raines the same guy who was Director of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget under Clinton? Coincidence, or...?

Below is a list obtained from OpenSecrets.org: 

Top 12 Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Campaign Contributions, 1989-2008

Name                             Office State Party     Grand Total    Total  PACs   Total Individuals 

1. Dodd, Christopher J     S         CT        D          $165,400      $48,500           $116,900

2. Obama, Barack            S          IL         D          $126,349      $6,000            $120,349

3. Kerry, John                  S          MA      D          $111,000      $2,000             $109,000

4. Bennett, Robert F         S         UT       R           $107,999      $71,499            $36,500

5. Bachus, Spencer           H         AL       R            $103,300      $70,500          $32,800

6. Blunt, Roy                   H         MO      R            $96,950       $78,500             $18,450

7. Kanjorski, Paul E        H          PA      D            $96,000        $57,500            $38,500

8. Bond, Christopher S    S          MO     R            $95,400        $64,000            $31,400

9. Shelby, Richard C       S          AL       R           $80,000        $23,000             $57,000

10. Reed, Jack                  S          RI        D           $78,250        $43,500           $34,750

11. Reid, Harry                S          NV       D           $77,000        $60,500           $16,500

12. Clinton, Hillary          S          NY       D           $76,050        $8,000              $68,050

Nancy Pelosi is number 17 on the list. The full list names just about everybody in both houses of Congress. Get the picture? 

At the very least since the Clinton Administration took power, and likely long before – like circa 1970 – there has been a financial Bermuda triangle between the White House, Congress and Freddie and Fannie. Money and power and influence and corruption swirl round and round, yet the data, evidence and memories of those involved in government sanctioned corruption seems to just disappear into thin air – especially when the good times go bad and someone else has to be blamed. It seems that it is always the same people involved in making your money disappear – and right into their own bank accounts in one way or another. Ah, the revolving doors of Washington DC!

When you look at this list of politicians who took Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae contributions over the last twelve years and read their names and party affiliations, one quickly realizes that the spirit of bipartisanship is indeed alive and well, at least when it comes to taking campaign contributions from quasi-government agencies chartered by Congress, certainly with that potentiality in mind.  

The whole list it is very incriminating to politicians of both parties. It is interesting to note, however, that most of the high dollar recipients were Democrats. This by no means absolves the Republicans - in fact it damns them. Not the number one recipient of these contributions, Senator Chris Dodd, Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. This Senator also received a sweetheart deal on a loan, as it turns out. Surprised? You needn’t be, because he is not alone. 

According to Portfolio.com, “Kent Conrad, Democrat from North Dakota, chairman of the Budget Committee and a member of the Finance Committee, refinanced properties through Countrywide’s “V.I.P.” program in 2003 and 2004, according to company documents.”

Here’s something else that won’t surprise you, because the MSM and the Democrat Party don’t want you to know about it, lest your feathers get a bit ruffled. “Other participants in the V.I.P. program included former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Alphonso Jackson, former Secretary of Health and Human Services Donna Shalala, and former U.N. ambassador and assistant Secretary of State Richard Holbrooke. Jackson was deputy H.U.D. secretary in the Bush administration when he received the loans in 2003. Shalala, who received two loans in 2002, had by then left the Clinton administration for her current position as president of the University of Miami. She is scheduled to receive a Presidential Medal of Freedom on June 19.”

Have you noticed anything that these folks, I mean crooks, have in common. They all worked… for a certain guy… at a particular address on Pennsylvania Avenue… Have you figured out the connection yet? Here’s one more clue just to help you out: “James Johnson, who had been advising presidential candidate Barack Obama on the selection of a running mate, resigned from the Obama campaign after the Wall Street Journal reported that he received Countrywide loans at below-market rates.”

There are many, many more. All of these former high ranking government officials who worked for a particular Democrat who served two terms between 1992 and 2000, and who received VIP treatment were referred to in Countrywide company emails and documents as “FOA”s, or Friends of Angelo – Countrywide CEO Angelo Mozilo. 

It appears, again according to Portfolio, that Angelo had many, many friends in very high places. “Henry Cisneros, who served as secretary of Housing and Urban Development in the Clinton administration; former White House staffer Paul Begala, now a commentator on CNN; and Postmaster General John Potter. Countrywide also offered special discounts to Congressional staffers involved in housing issues.”

Angelo’s tentacles were far reaching: Countrywide spent over $1.5 lobbying Capitol Hill in 2005. Here’s an interesting anecdote. “Jimmie Williams, a Countrywide lobbyist in Washington, was remarkably candid in emails about the purpose of V.I.P. loans. In November 2002, for instance, Williams urged Feinberg’s boss, Doug Perry, to give “specialized handling” to an application from a staff lawyer for the House subcommittee that monitors the Department of Housing and Urban Development. HUD regulates real estate settlements and closing costs and runs the Federal Housing Administration, the agency that guarantees mortgages. Williams pointed out that Clinton Jones III, senior counsel of the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity, was “also an adviser to ranking Republican members of Congress responsible for legislation of interest to the financial services industry and of importance to Countrywide.” Jones borrowed $101,800. So what. Who is this Clinton Jones, anyway?

Clinton Jones III is now vice president for industry relations at Fannie Mae. The lobbyist, Williams, is currently state director for federal residential-mortgage bundler Freddie Mac – you know, the guys who bundles up all this bad debt and sells it to firms on Wall Street. Also worthy of note is the fact that depending on the year, Fannie Mae bought anywhere from 10 to 30 percent of its loans from Countrywide, which they would bundle with other bad loans and then sell again. Are you holding your nose yet? Wait – there’s still more! 

Many current and former Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae executives received VIP loans from Countrywide. Former Fannie Mae C.E.O. James Johnson was given home loans at relatively low interest rates, and Countrywide waived points for him. In fact, company documents show that after leaving Fannie Mae, Johnson received more than $7 million in VIP loans. Just in case you forgot, that’s the same James Johnson who Senator Barack Obama appointed to vet his potential VP candidates. I think you get the point.

These were the just some of the players involved in the high-risk mortgage game. Granted, many of these people just named would have no problems paying back the loans, but when one is given such VIP treatments and so many of these types of VIP loans are made that may preclude a company such as Countrywide from adequately covering its costs, who do you think that cost gets passed on to. Did your Countrywide mortgage rate increase over the last couple of years? Mine did. Gee, I wonder why?

So, you had at least one major mortgage company giving away sweetheart deals to those who wield political power and leaving the rest of us to make up the difference coupled with pressure from the Clinton Administration to approve loans to millions of people who couldn’t afford them and shouldn’t have been given loans and lines of credit in the first place. What, then, do you have? According to the left you have a conspiracy theory, for it is understood in official circles that there were no Democrats involved. That means the MSM doesn’t tell you about it – so you have to hunt around to find the information, even though everyone in Washington knows who did what.

According to Politico, Nancy Pelosi had this to say “Eight years of weakened regulation of our nation’s financial system — including a failure to regulate risky, and often predatory, lending practices — by the Bush administration and Republicans in Congress have led us to this point, and could further erode our nation’s economic health.”

Doesn’t seem to jive, now does it? Remember too that Pelosi has a vested interest in NOT being found complicit I this scandal – she’s Speaker of the House and number 17 on the recipients list for Freddie and Fannie. Funny how these things always seem to triangulate in Washington, isn’t it? 

Obviously, if you’re thinking that there might be some hearings on this little matter of our entire financial sector imploding, you can forget it. The left will blame Bush and McCain and the MSM will ignore the inconvenient fact that Obama is up to his ears in this mess – if for nothing else than really, really bad judgment in appointing or having anything whatsoever to do with a miscreant like Johnson. If everyone is making some money, then all is well among the corrupted elite; no harm, no foul, right? That is at least if you’re the DC insiders making the money, cutting the deals, brokering power and influence, and covering your tracks – or at least trying to.

So, as the financial feeding frenzy really ramped up, Freddie, Fannie and the bulk of the remaining major lenders began delving into the high-risk loan market and issuing lines of credit and approving loans for more and more people who shouldn’t have had them while jumping in bed with Congress and the apparently the whole former Clinton White House. They just couldn’t control themselves, I guess, with the potential sitting there for such huge, monetary gains and political favors waiting to be granted. 

You have to love the Looney-Left. While the Obama campaign is still reeling from the knockout punch delivered by the addition of Sarah Palin to the GOP ticket, they have become increasingly desperate as evidenced by their underhanded and loathsome personal attacks against Palin and her family. And, while Obama and his official campaign surrogates may smugly deny the smears, you know they are grasping at straws and giving each other the ol’ fist pump as each new attack is made.

After wild and baseless accusations alleging Sarah Palin was really Trigg’s grandmother, after screaming about alleged abuse of power with the so-called Troopergate scandal, after insulting her and her hometown of Wasilla, after all of these smears failed to bring Palin down, the Left has done the only thing they could – they’ve turned to God for help. 

You see, the Democrat Party actually discovered God just prior to the commencement of their 2008 convention in Denver, and since then religion has caught on like wildfire – or a burning bush, as the case may be. And, surprisingly, nowhere in the party is this newfound faith in God more apparent than, miracle of miracles, the Looney-Left!

In fact for only having known God for just a few weeks, they’ve had quite the revelation in so short a period of time. As Michael Moore and Don Fowler put it so aptly, Hurricane Gustav bearing down on New Orleans the very day the GOP convention was set to begin was clearly a sign from God that He is firmly in the race for Obama and the Democrats. Of course – how could it be otherwise? And this has been confirmed by the latest revelation to the Democrat Faithful.

After losing the “experience” wars over the last week The Almighty has once again shone the light of His divine favor upon the Democrat Party be revealing that Jesus was not merely the Son of God Most High, but also was a Marxist community organizer who apparently championed redistribution of wealth on a massive scale, kowtowing to radical Islam, turning the other cheek, willingly going the extra mile and loving one’s neighbor, except of course when that neighbor happens to be a conservative woman named Sarah Palin.

Why just yesterday Susan Sarandon was on one of those really informative “celebrity news” shows and said, “You know, Jesus was a community organizer and Pontius Pilate was a governor. That’s all I have to say about that.” Wow! Such profundity! I had no idea she was such a fluent Biblical scholar.

In fact, in just the past week, Madame Speaker Nancy Pelosi – herself a most gifted and charismatic leader as evidenced by her monumental accomplishments in overseeing the 110^th Congress – acknowledged that Obama is “a gift from God.” Not to be outdone by their boss Pelosi or the esteemed Hollywood elite, Democrat Representatives Steve Cohen and Donna Brazile also made the point of affirming and validating Obama’s service to his nation as a community organizer, and not just at some fly-over political rally. No, Cohen had this to say on the floor of the US House of Representatives: “I submit to you, Mr. Speaker, that the parties have differences, but if you want change, you want the Democratic Party. Barack Obama was a community organizer like Jesus, who our minister prayed about. Pontius Pilate was a governor.” Brazile said the same thing on Wolfe Blitzer’s show.

Now I don’t know about you, but I am awfully glad that the Democrats have finally discovered God and seem to quickly be getting over their hang-up on that Church-and-State thing they used to complain so often and bitterly about. 

I guess the forgot that their heroes like FDR, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton were also governors – just like Pontius Pilate. I guess now that they’ve discovered Jesus, they’ll eventually re-write the Gospels too, just like they’ve done to history. I wonder when they’ll start blaming Jesus for Judas’ death and condemnation to hell. I mean after all, Jesus knew what Judas was going to do, didn’t he? Couldn’t he have stopped him? Why, He didn’t even try! Can you see the outrage coming?

Oh, and what about the war? Jesus/Obama is certainly against war – any war. Remember that thing about loving thy neighbor? And what about “thou shalt not kill?” All very true indeed. However, I have a couple of slight problems with this newfound Democrat Theology, especially since their messiah doesn’t seem to believe that the 6^th Commandment applies to newborn infants that so inconveniently survive their own attempted murder. Call me a skeptic, a villain, or whatever you will, but I’m not buying it.

You’ve got to love the Looney-Left. You’d think that after 2000 and 2004 someone over their on the Left would have enough sense to tell these people to shut up until after the election and ruthlessly silence them as they are so fond of doing to any opposition.

On the other hand maybe, just maybe, Pelosi, Sarendon, Donna Brazile and Steve Cohen are a gift from God to the GOP. Gee, ya think?

The 110^th Congress has hit record low approval ratings according to recent Gallup and Rasmussen polls. Gallup recorded a 19% overall approval rating from its poll conducted 9 through 12 June 2008. The results of the Rasmussen poll show that “Congressional ratings first hit nine percent (9%) back at the beginning of July, marking the lowest ratings recorded by Rasmussen Reports. Ratings hit the same low two weeks later. Congress has not received higher than a 15% approval rating since the beginning of this year.” In fairness, Congress typically has the lowest ratings of the three branches polled.

Broken down by party affiliation, Gallup shows Democrats giving Congress a 23% approval rating, with Independents and Republicans coming in at about 17% and 16%, respectively. The Rasmussen numbers differ some, reporting a mere 13% positive rating among Democrats, with Republicans coming in at 8% and Independents giving only 3% approval to the job the current Congress is doing. Regardless of the difference in the percentage numbers, it would appear as though the 110^th Congress has a mighty PR problem on its hands.

According to Rasmussen, 63% percent of voters identifying themselves as not affiliated with either main political party showed the most discontent with the Congress saying it is doing a poor job. According to the Gallup polls, the general disapproval rating for this Congress is hovering at around 75%. Based on it’s own historical tracking data for Congress, the Gallup report said that these rating are “the worst Gallup has measured since it began tracking Congressional job approval in 1974.”

The Rasmussen report states further that just “12% of voters think Congress has passed any legislation to improve life in this country over the past six months. That number has ranged from 11% to 13% throughout 2008. The majority of voters (62%) say Congress has not passed any legislation to improve life in America.” In fact, the 110^th Congress has passed over 1900 “symbolic resolutions,” such as designating National Watermelon Month and National Funeral Director and Mortician Recognition Day. This Congress has also just recently resolved to issue a formal apology for slavery.

An article published 30 April 2008 in the New York Times stated: “Americans are pumping their paychecks into their gas tanks, and the economy is in a stall. Food scarcities threaten governments overseas and spur hoarding at home. Foreclosures are up, home sales are down. Progress in Iraq and Afghanistan is halting… Frustration is building as lawmakers see a major disconnect between the everyday anxieties of people back home and the Washington agenda.”

Indeed the frustration is real among American voters, as evidenced by the polls. The big question now is, “how will this frustration pan out in November?” Will the growing discontent with the direction of the nation and the seeming ineptitude of Congress translate into any action? If this last session most recently adjourned coupled with Speaker Pelosi [25% overall approval rating] and Congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle’s reluctance to even address those issues voters find important is any indication of what is to come, suffice it to say that November could prove very interesting indeed. One can only hope that Madame Speaker will make good on her promise and motto and, now having proved that the politics as usual attitude has been an abysmal failure, at least try a New Direction.  Perhaps she will.  After all, Madame speaker has already stated her approval for a bailout for the auto industry to the initial tune of $50 billion, and won't rule out Congressional approval for more taxpayer funding for other ailing industries.  So she's really not lying, right?  Because, after all, socialism and nationalization of industry is certainly a New Direction. 

Why Pro-Abortion Catholics Are Wrong

Here’s an opinionated statement for you: Anyone who calls themselves an “ardent practicing” Christian yet maintains a pro-abortion stance is dead wrong. This is most especially so with Catholics – and I have the facts to prove it. To slice up the Christian interdenominational pie and examine the various pieces, and more importantly the beliefs and behavior of those who consider themselves to be faithful Christians however, you might think otherwise. And at the present time there is no denomination where this is more apparent than among Catholics. What is truly ironic about this is that the Catholic Church unequivocally states that abortion is a grave evil, is never justifiable and that merely condoning the act [taking the stance of being pro-abortion] is an excommunicable offense. 

Observe the text of the Catechism of the Catholic Church paragraphs 2270-2275:

Abortion

2270 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.72

Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.73

My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth.74

2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:

You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.75

God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.76

2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. "A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,"77 "by the very commission of the offense,"78 and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law.79 The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.

2273 The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation:

"The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being's right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death."80

"The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined. . . . As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child's rights."81

2274 Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being.

Prenatal diagnosis is morally licit, "if it respects the life and integrity of the embryo and the human fetus and is directed toward its safe guarding or healing as an individual. . . . It is gravely opposed to the moral law when this is done with the thought of possibly inducing an abortion, depending upon the results: a diagnosis must not be the equivalent of a death sentence."82

2275 "One must hold as licit procedures carried out on the human embryo which respect the life and integrity of the embryo and do not involve disproportionate risks for it, but are directed toward its healing the improvement of its condition of health, or its individual survival."83

"It is immoral to produce human embryos intended for exploitation as disposable biological material."84

"Certain attempts to influence chromosomic or genetic inheritance are not therapeutic but are aimed at producing human beings selected according to sex or other predetermined qualities. Such manipulations are contrary to the personal dignity of the human being and his integrity and identity"85 which are unique and unrepeatable.

Pelosi added, “So again, over the history of the church, this is an issue of controversy. But it is, it is also true that God has given us, each of us, a free will and a responsibility to answer for our actions. And we want abortions to be safe, rare, and reduce the number of abortions. That’s why we have this fight in Congress over contraception.” [emphasis mine] Suffice it to say that Madame Speaker confuses free will with license, the latter being a distortion and a perversion of the former.

In response to these outrageous claims of Nancy Pelosi that the Church would condone an individual Catholic to believe that abortion is indeed a legitimate act, Archbishop Chaput – a man who will not shy away from speaking the true he is obligated to teach and uphold had this to say in a letter written specifically to address this subject: “We now know with biological certainty exactly when human life begins. Thus, today’s religious alibis for abortion and a so-called ‘right to choose’ are nothing more than that – alibis that break radically with historic Christian and Catholic belief.”

“Abortion kills an unborn, developing human life. It is always gravely evil, and so are the evasions employed to justify it. Catholics who make excuses for it – whether they’re famous or not – fool only themselves and abuse the fidelity of those Catholics who do sincerely seek to follow the Gospel and live their Catholic faith.”

Indeed! Hopefully more Catholic Bishops will follow Archbishop Chaput’s lead in teaching the faith, not shying away from it. It is unfortunate that so few currently do, for it is exactly this relaxation of teaching the faith and strict adherence to the Magisterium [the teaching office of the Church comprised of the Pope, the Bishops, Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition] over the last four decades that resulted in such terrible scandal suffered by not just the Church, but the whole world. It is this relaxation, this complicity with rampant immorality, this disregard for the teachings of Christ by some Bishops who by their action and inaction gave wrought scandal among God’s people. 

The Catholic Church defines scandal as: “an attitude or behavior which leads another to do evil. The person who gives scandal becomes his neighbor's tempter. He damages virtue and integrity; he may even draw his brother into spiritual death. Scandal is a grave offense if by deed or omission another is deliberately led into a grave offense. Scandal takes on a particular gravity by reason of the authority of those who cause it or the weakness of those who are scandalized. It prompted our Lord to utter this curse: "Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened round his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea."86 Scandal is grave when given by those who by nature or office are obliged to teach and educate others. Jesus reproaches the scribes and Pharisees on this account: he likens them to wolves in sheep's clothing.87 Scandal can be provoked by laws or institutions, by fashion or opinion.”

Though there are differences between the many Christian denominations, we can all agree on the core tenets of the teachings of Christ and in particular, as regards abortion, this: that no authentic Christian denomination would hold that abortion and infanticide are acceptable practices or in any way justifiable. Every authentic Christian denomination would agree that the crime of abortion can never be justified or acceptable, for it is a crime, a sin that cries out to God for vengeance: and God, who is Just, will answer that cry. Even those denomination without a centralized teaching authority accept the Words of Sacred Scripture: “Thou shalt not kill.”

It is no wonder that politicians the likes of Pelosi and Kennedy are so misguided, likely having poor examples of mentorship in their formative years, very likely in the form of teachers, priests and religious sisters who taught outright defiance of the basic tenets of the faith. This is an acceptable excuse for their earlier misguided opinions and actions, but no longer, because they, by their own evasive words, condemn themselves; and, unfortunately mislead many others into believing that they are correct. In the Catholic Church the only “choice” is to believe or to reject the teachings of Christ. We now know where the likes of Pelosi, Kennedy, Kerry and Biden stand. Praise be to God for giving Archbishop Chaput the courage to call them on it.

With the economy in a shambles, the government rescuing banks from liquidation and the housing market all but collapsed, it might be a good thing that Pelosi and the rest of her minions are on vacation. Seriously. They are the ones responsible for getting us into this mortgage mess in the first place – can you imagine how completely screwed up it will be when they go back to “work” and try to “solve” the problem? I mean, we all know how great the Federal Government is at fixing things and getting stuff done in a timely manner and on-budget. Yeah, right. Budget –a word that nowadays seems even more elusive to our increasingly incompetent representatives in Washington. The sad thing is that when they come back from vacation they will try to fix the mortgage problem. Guess how? Yup! You guessed right! – They’ll just do what they always do and what never works: they’ll more money that the Treasury doesn’t have at a couple of the primary culprits, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. 

The more I learn about these two institutions, the more upset I become. I’ll only deal with Freddie Mac in this post, because the two are, for all intents and purposes, identical. The following comes from the Freddie Mac website:

Freddie Mac “is a stockholder-owned corporation established by Congress in 1970 to provide liquidity, stability and affordability to the nation's residential mortgage markets. Freddie Mac raises capital on Wall Street and throughout the world's capital markets to finance mortgages for families across America. Over the years, Freddie Mac has made home possible for one in six homebuyers and more than five million renters.” [Emphasis mine]

“As a government-sponsored enterprise with an important public mission to make housing finance more accessible and affordable, Freddie Mac is unique. We have special responsibilities to the American people. It's incumbent upon us to carry out these responsibilities to the best of our abilities.” [Emphasis mine]

This part of a letter from Richard F. Syron, Freddie Mac's Chairman and CEO is almost comical, in a very dark way, in light of what is going on in the housing market:

“Freddie Mac plays a critical role in financing homes for America's families and providing strength and resiliency to America's economy. I aspire to no greater legacy than to build public trust in an institution chartered by Congress to ensure the stability, liquidity and accessibility of the nation's mortgage markets.” [Emphasis mine]

All of this leads to several concerns.   First and foremost, since when does the Congress actually have the Constitutional authority to charter an institution to ensure the stability, liquidity and accessibility of anything? This is not the function of Congress, it is the function of the market – you remember, the FREE market, where people set prices they think people will pay for stuff they think people will want to buy, all without government rushing in to “fix” things that would balance themselves anyway? As a student of government I was blissfully unaware that the government had any obligation or authority to “raise capital on Wall Street and throughout the world's capital markets to finance mortgages for families across America.” Aha! So, this is how Freddie Mac is simultaneously a stockholder-owned corporation established by Congress as well as a government-sponsored enterprise. Wait a minute – I think I get it! 

Correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding of this example of a “public/private partnership” goes something like this: A bunch of Congressmen and Senators get together with some representatives of banking and mortgage lending special interests [yes, really] and figure out that they can: 1. violate the limitations on governmental authority and scope set forth in the Constitution; 2. Set up a “corporation” with private money and private investors to engage in high risk loans and activities that could potentially turn a tremendous profit, but that no one would be foolish enough to undertake unless, of course, the investment was guaranteed by the Federal Government; 3. Use this new “corporation” as a place to reward their political hack buddies with nice, high paying jobs. Wow! That really takes the risk out of “high-risk” now, doesn’t it?

Of major concern ought to be this: Freddie and Fannie are both a stockholder-owned corporations established by Congress as well as a government-sponsored enterprise. That means they are “run” essentially by the government – worse, the Congress, - and are accountable to no one – just like the Congress. It also means that those investors have no risk, for given the fact that these “corporations” were created by Congress, it stands to reason that they would be the largest monstrosity in the mortgage industry. And, given that fact, if either one collapsed then the entire housing market, and then other segments of the economy, would likely be dragged to the bottom. Get the picture? If you have the capital to invest, theoretically you can’t lose – the Government will not let Freddie or Fannie collapse because they can’t. 

Now, given the fact that the housing market has been in an abysmal state for months, if not years, and seems only to be getting worse, there has been speculation over the last several months about what is to be done to correct the situation. Oh, the Fed, you know – our Soviet-style central bank that all the Founding Fathers except Hamilton warned against - tweaked the interest rates again and then didn’t tweak them again, and we all got some of our money back from our dear friends at the IRS, and guess what? It didn’t work! 

Worse yet, there has been much speculation about the possibility of a Government bailout for these two pillars of socialism. In fact, there was an article in the International Herald Tribune [the international edition of the New York Times]:

“Financial conditions are continuing to worsen at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, leading some investors to prepare for a government bailout of the U.S. housing giants even as the Treasury Department and the companies say such government intervention will not be necessary.

"The markets are acting like a bailout is inevitable," said Sean Egan, managing director of Egan-Jones Ratings, an independent credit ratings firm.

Egan said he believed the federal government would need to help pump about $20 billion into each company, possibly through a government guarantee rather than through a direct injection of capital.

"We believe Treasury is going to be forced to act within the next couple of weeks," he added. "Probably some time after Labor Day, when investors are back from vacations so that the bailout has the biggest possible positive impact."”

Calls for a bailout by Uncle Sam! Imagine! For those of you who are not yet sufficiently cynical about this kind of stuff, let me assist you on your way to my happy place: This is a classic example of cronyism. It is special interests making deals with our elected officials who, incidentally know they don’t have to be accountable for their actions because even if they get voted out by an angry electorate, there’s always work at Freddie and Fannie. These two bastions of Government waste and excess cannot be allowed to collapse because there are too many politicians and hacks dependent upon them for their living. Now, here’s the best part – at least if you’re a politician who may be in need of a job come November: “With an implicit promise of federal backing, Fannie and Freddie have borrowed money at low rates and used these funds to purchase and hold large portfolios of mortgages and mortgage-backed securities, now totaling $1.4 trillion.” Did you get that number? In case you didn’t, that was $1.4 trillion, as in $1.4 trillion in addition to the massive deficit we are already carrying that is going to bring about the economic collapse of an economy that was once the most vibrant in the world.

Just to make sure you get the idea, here are some excerpts from a piece called Crony Capitalism Meltdown published 18 July:

“Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are called government-sponsored enterprises. At times, Congress has seemed a Fannie Mae- and Freddie Mac-sponsored enterprise. The companies spent $200 million on lobbying and campaign contributions during the past decade. They lavished dollars on members of Congress, hired key Washington players for lucrative executive positions and extended the largesse to nonprofits through a charitable foundation and to congressional districts around the country through so-called partnership offices.

For a senator or congressman to get on the Senate Banking or House Financial Services committees was a guaranteed ride on the Fannie and Freddie gravy train. With their sharp lobbying elbows, sometimes it was unclear who was doing oversight on whom.

Whatever the question, the answer in Congress was always forestalling significant tightening of Fannie and Freddie’s operations. After the savings and loan debacle in the early 1990s, the institutions fought off meaningful new regulations. After Fannie was caught cooking its books to the tune of $6.3 billion a few years ago, the institutions still escaped reform. With the subprime mortgage market in meltdown lately, Congress has wanted Fannie and Freddie to assume even more risk.

Fannie and Freddie exist to bolster mortgage lenders — and therefore homeownership — by buying mortgages, guaranteeing them and selling them on the secondary market. With an implicit promise of federal backing, Fannie and Freddie have borrowed money at low rates and used these funds to purchase and hold large portfolios of mortgages and mortgage-backed securities, now totaling $1.4 trillion. In short, the government gets the risk, the executives and shareholders get the profits.

“Unlike many well-capitalized savings and loans and commercial banks,” Alan Greenspan warned in 2004, “Fannie and Freddie have chosen not to manage that risk by holding greater capital.” Why would they, if Uncle Sam is underwriting them? Fannie and Freddie kept Congress from limiting their expansion and from tightening their capital requirements. Instead, Fannie and Freddie have been recklessly undercapitalized at debt-to-equity ratios of 20-1 or more, when Bank of America and J. P. Morgan are at roughly 4-1.”

Good stuff, eh? Are you mad yet? You should be, because when Congress comes back into session after their break you can bet that Pelosi will rally her minions – with little opposition from Republicans, I should think – and have the issue of a massive trillion-dollar bailout on the floor for a vote in record time. Then you and I will be charged with yet another couple of trillion dollars we’ll have to pay off – that is, unless the Chi-Coms lend it to us. You know, this could easily surpass the monumental achievements of this Congress in their previous session – even the whole thing about apologizing for slavery. Big stuff.

And so it is. But why? It just doesn’t make sense to me. A Congress with a %14 approval rating, and Madame Speaker with a 9% approval rating. And the people will re-elect them all. And if they do, the people will get exactly what they deserve. Empty promises, flowery rhetoric, and screwed.