McCain's running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, speaking in Colorado Springs, Colo., said Fannie and Freddie had "gotten too big and too expensive to the taxpayers." The companies, however, aren't taxpayer funded but operate as private companies. The takeover may result in a taxpayer bailout during reorganization.
Monday, September 08, 2008
Drudge Watch
Drudge is STILL pimping Obama's "my Muslim faith" as a slip. It's been up for at least 24 hours. He still, though, has no entry for Palin's Fannie/Freddie gaffe:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
What's wrong?, she's right. They're too big and too expensive.
She got it right. if that's the best you got, ok.
No, no. She thought that they WERE government organizations this whole time. It's true that NOW they're going to be expensive for taxpayers.
How do you get that out of what she said? The campaign had been notified of the bailout bf she spoke, she knew it was going to be "expensive." QED and bwa-ha-ha.
Verb tense.
huh. don't see it.
My take: The Palin comment is well within the margin of error on the campaign trail. There is no "gaffe" here. Congress earlier this summer -- in the housing bill that both John McCain and Barack Obama supported but didn't bother to vote on -- gave Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. a blank check* to invest in Fannie or Freddie. It OKd a big bailout. Perhaps in your book a blank check freshly signed by Congress is not "too expensive." Perhaps you trust the government not to spend a blank check. Perhaps pigs have wings. Palin was right: The very existence of a blank check means that Fannie and Freddie are too expensive to taxpayers.
*In a comforting bedtime story that several members of Congress actually believed, Paulson said the blank check was so big and powerful (a bazooka of cash!) he would never have to use it. By the time Palin spoke, it was clear that Paulson's attempt at "verbal intervention" had failed and that real taxpayer money will be spent to prop up Fannie and Freddie. No one knows how much, but the Treasury has signed contracts to invest up to $100 billion in each company. Oh, and loan them money too. Oh, and buy their mortgage-backed securities. Do you really want to argue that she made a mistake by saying the two companies are "too big and too expensive to the taxpayers"?
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/laland/2008/09/did-palin-make.html
Right now, the federal government, at a huge cost to taxpayers of perhaps $100 billion, is bailing out the two government-backed mortgage giants, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — the so-called GSEs. “GSE” stands for Government-Sponsored Enterprise. But some reporters are financially-illiterate, because if you point out the obvious — that the GSEs are going to cost taxpayers billions — reporters will condescendingly “correct” what you said, by insisting that they are completely “private sector” entities (false) that have yet to cost taxpayers a dime (false). (Back in July, the predicted cost to taxpayers was already already over $25 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The cost could be up to $300 billion).
http://www.openmarket.org/2008/09/09/are-reporters-financially-illiterate-fannie-and-freddie-are-called-government-sponsored-enterprises-for-a-reason/
Post a Comment