Let me see if I got this straight...

...so, today I read that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulsen wants to temporarily expand the tax-exempt bond programs of state and local governments, so that they can refinance mortgages. Let me think about that for a minute.

We got into this mess because banks were lending to people that they shouldn't have, or lending more than borrowers could pay. It caused a high enough foreclosure rate that nobody could sell mortgage-backed securities because the buyers didn't know what they were worth.

Now, it will be tax-free municipal bonds backed by the same loan principal, lent to the same borrowers.

If it's done under the same (or similar) terms as the original loan, haven't we just done to the municipal bond market what we did to the secondary mortgage market?

If the new loan terms are substantially better than the old terms, aren't we penalizing people who were responsible, and have paid thousands more for a conservative, conventional 30-year fixed?

People like me?

I just bought a house. Big one. Nice one. I love it. But you know what? If I had taken what I currently pay on my 30-year fixed mortgage, and used that for an 80/20 interest only loan with a teaser rate, I could have afforded a much bigger, much nicer home. But I didn't do that. Wanna know why?

Because I knew I couldn't predict the future, and I might find myself in a situation where I was being forced to refinance, and I either didn't want to (high rates), or I couldn't (no job).

Now, it sounds like people who weren't as cautious as me are getting a do-over.

Can I have a do-over please? I'd like to be qualified for a loan the way people were over the last few years (no income verification, liberal repayment schedule), and I'll buy a much bigger house. 80/20 interest-only with a teaser, please. Where I'm at, the housing market is still very strong, but in the event I can't sell my old house, I want to be bailed out by the government. If my circumstances change, and my payment goes up, and I can't afford the loan that I agreed to, I want to be bailed out by the government.

And why stop at homes? Can we do this with my mutual funds, too? If I invest all of my money in a precious-metals fund, and gold stops its historic run, can the government make up the difference for me? And what about bonds? What if GMAC goes bankrupt, and my GMAC bonds are near-worthless? Can the government cover my cost? Even better, can the government cover my expected gain?

I think you can see where I'm going with this. Taken to the extreme, these government bailouts of risk-gone-wrong are simply unsustainable.

While I am sympathetic to those who agreed to terms that they could not understand, and to those who were manipulated by unscrupulous lenders or brokers, I simply cannot ignore reality and conclude that the government should wave its magic wand and make the problem go away.

Here's a Reality Check: turning a private-sector problem into a government problem DOES NOT solve the problem.

A Historic Day in Totalitarianism

Wow. Big news in the dictatorships of the world over the last couple of days. First of all, Russian President Vladimir Putin won a sweeping victory in his election, amid charges of rigged votes, coercion and intimidation. You know, like you're SUPPOSED to vote in a totalitarian state.

Now, we move on to Venezuela, where President Hugo Chavez, whom even Nancy Pelosi has publicly referred to as a thug, lost.

Yep. He LOST. He had proposed a never-look-back socialist paradise, with him at the helm for all eternity, and his people said NO THANKS. Well, about 51% of them said no. And he accepted the decision of the people. For now, anyway.

When Putin first came on the global stage, I will admit that I was suckered. I genuinely believed that he understood that free markets were the best thing for his people, and that KGB-era stifling of creativity was a big part of the demise of the U.S.S.R. Sadly, he seems to want to have his cake and eat it too - economic entrepreneurship right up to the point of profit, at which point the government snatches your business and crushes your dreams. Let the people vote, but only if you can know, and control, the outcome.

He's probably laughing at Chavez right now. After all, in Russia, losing by 2% is just a paperwork problem. But you know what? As hard as it is for me to admit this, this week, Chavez was the better man.

Democrat voters get what they asked for

I have to comment on this article about the frustration among antiwar Democrat voters. You see, they thought that the 2006 elections were 'a mandate on Iraq'. Here's an example:

"Democrats aren't any better on the war issue than the Republicans. Very few would get our troops out and home and not leave any behind. A lot of candidates are backpedaling on their stance on the war and I'm not sure why. Seventy percent of Americans want this war to end."

Here's the problem. Everything this person has said is false, and has been fed to her by a liberal, anti-Republican media, which is why she's so confused. I can help.

Democrats are worse on the war issue than the Republicans, because they lie about it. When they're up for reelection, they say they're opposed to it, but in reality they know that it is a war we must win, and we won't give up until we're done. We're doing it in our own self-interest, and in the hopes of a better life for all people in the Middle East. They're just not above lying about it to get your vote, lady. And they did.

There will not be an opportunity to " get our troops out and home and not leave any behind" anytime soon. Iraq is militarily strategic, and a leader who abandons it is negligent and incompetent. Get used to it, and get over it.

"A lot of candidates are backpedaling on their stance on the war" because you are a sucker. You're going to protest, and complain, and vote for them anyway. They know it, believe me. It's their central political strategy. I mean, c'mon, do you really think they're afraid you'll vote for a Republican? Get real.

Actually, it's not the case that "seventy percent of Americans want this war to end". It's actually more like 100 percent. But most of us want to win first, because we don't want to die. So wake up, and understand your role. As an antiwar Democrat, you are a pawn in a power game, and you're being controlled and used by your leaders. And I can tell you like it.

Because you're planning to vote for them yet again.

Wake up.

Ahmadinejad at Columbia University

In my opinion, the elitist liberals at Columbia University are doing us a tremendous service by showing us exactly who they are by allowing the Kidnapper-In-Chief of Iran to speak there, while silencing the military over the 'don't ask, don't tell' policies regarding homosexuals.

As Michael Barone points out, they apparently don't consider the execution of homosexuals nearly as offensive as forcing homosexuals to not discuss their homosexuality while in the military.

Glenn Reynolds thinks it's because the Kidnapper-In-Chief is so anti-Bush. I think it's simpler than that.

Quite simply, if you treat the SILENCING of homosexuals more harshly than you treat the EXECUTION of homosexuals, you are a hypocritical, non-thinking IDIOT.

So, the liberal elites at Columbia are not Bush-hating, anti-American protectors of the rights of homosexuals, they are simply idiots who believe that they can be advocates of homosexuals, while they give the key to the city to someone who EXECUTES them. Again, IDIOTS. No further analysis necessary.

Columbia's liberal elites, were they not idiots, would clearly recognize that the Iranian regime oppresses a 'protected class' - homosexuals - in the harshest possible way - summary execution. These non-idiots would then condemn the executions, and Ahmadinejad would not be allowed to speak.

That is what they would do if they were NOT idiots. They will soon establish that they absolutely ARE idiots. Watch.

Title for Teddy Kennedy's new book

Jay Tea at WizBang is trying to help Teddy out with a title for his new book. It made me think of this, which I found a long time ago on the Internet. Wish I could figure out whose work this is...

Never Forget.

It's hard to believe that it has been 6 years. 6 years since I walked out of the shower, glanced over at the TV, saw the smoking building, saw the plane slam into Tower II, and knew we were at war.

It's hard to believe, only because so many seem to have forgotten.

I haven't.

We saw an evil on that day that defied our collective imagination. We came together almost as one in the days to follow, behind a leader who, if his success exceeded everyone's wildest expectations, still could not possibly be expected to prevent another bloodthirsty, senseless attack like this.

And yet, for the past 6 years, he has managed to do just that.

Those of you who remember how you felt that day should recognize that because of the bravery of our servicemen, and the leadership of our Commander-In-Chief, you have only had to feel it again in your memories.

Those of you who are irate with this President over other issues - immigration reform, Harriet Miers, Terry Schiavo, the timing of the departure of Donald Rumsfeld, etc., should take a minute and ask yourself how important issues like these were to you on September 12, 2001, when you were simply worried about the survival of your family, and of your way of life. And you should briefly thank him for keeping the demons out of your backyard, so you could worry about other things.

Those of you who think 9/11 was an inside job are idiots, and I thank God that you are not in charge of anything. You choose to ignore an actual threat, and invent an imaginary one. You would get us all killed. You need to read this, you need to wake up, and you need to help the rest of us in our fight to protect your right to be an idiot.

May God bless our leaders, our brave troops, and the families of those who lost so very much that day. You are all in my prayers.

Never forget.

When I'm wrong about being wrong...

...I'll admit that, too.

It seems that the Bin Laden video (which I haven't watched, and am trusting the media and blogosphere to report upon for me) shows no video motion during ANY current events references...

Osama Bin Laden's widely publicized video address to the American people has a peculiarity that casts serious doubt on its authenticity: the video freezes at about 1 minute and 36 58 seconds, and motion only resumes again at 12:30. The video then freezes again at 14:02 remains frozen until the end. All references to current events, such as the 62nd anniversary of the U.S. atomic bombing of Japan, and Sarkozy and Brown being the leaders of France and the UK, respectively, occur when the video is frozen! The words spoken when the video is in motion contain no references to contemporary events and could have been (and likely were) made before the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

Well. I suppose I'll have to apologize to my readers for not doing the investigation myself and watching it myself. Had I done so, I'm sure I would have noticed that whenever Caveboy spoke about something modern, that his lips weren't moving. Why no one else out in the blogosphere noticed until now is beyond me; the mainstream media, on the other hand... well, they miss this sort of stuff all the time. I have good reasons for not watching Bin Laden videos, though:

• Bin Laden needs to speak English when he's talking to me. I don't know Arabic, and as a result, when someone sends me a message in Arabic, I can't understand it so I don't listen to it.
• I tend to boycott things I can't stand. Unfortunately, as much as I can't stand Caveboy, as an American blogger who supports the destruction of his movement, I feel compelled to blog about him occasionally (especially to speculate that he's pushing up Cacti somewhere). I used to blog about Michael Moore, too, but I ain't gonna watch his damn movies. I wouldn't give him the satisfaction. Not watchin' Bin Laden's damn movies, either.
• When I'm looking at a video of a man who has purportedly been living in caves for the past 5 years, I can't stop thinking about the smell. These are not good thoughts. These are not good smells.
  
• Finally, I'm pretty sure that Caveboy is dead. Since he's dead, his movie is fake. I don't watch fake movies. I didn't watch this one, and I didn't watch Al Gore's fake movie either.