Government created the financial market climate responsible for the risky loans that should never have been given. Yet government has now appointed itself the savior that will rescue us from bad decisions made by government. How this guy can be so far off base is amazing.

Self-reliance. Individual responsibility. A faith in free markets and a belief that people should have the opportunity to fail or succeed on the basis of their hard work and ingenuity. These are qualities that have been as central to the national identity as they have been to the American economic model.

Which is why it is so extraordinary that the government now finds itself hip-deep in the direct management of the financial system, rescuing four of the country’s biggest financial institutions — Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and now Lehman Brothers — from the harsh discipline of markets and the consequences of their own misjudgments.

This unprecedented intrusion of government is coming in the waning days of the administration of a Republican president who made privatization, deregulation and a faith in free markets the centerpiece of his economic policies and of his political agenda.

In case you don’t know it Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were created by the federal government.

In recent months, the nation’s two largest mortgage finance lenders have come under increasing scrutiny at the hands of Congress, the Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The Federal National Mortgage Association, nicknamed Fannie Mae, and the Federal Home Mortgage Corporation, nicknamed Freddie Mac, have operated since 1968 as government sponsored enterprises (GSEs). This means that, although the two companies are privately owned and operated by shareholders, they are protected financially by the support of the Federal Government. These government protections include access to a line of credit through the U.S. Treasury, exemption from state and local income taxes and exemption from SEC oversight. A recent accounting scandal at Freddie Mac that resulted in the replacement of three of the company’s top executives has led to mounting concerns over the privileged status these GSEs enjoy in the marketplace.

Let’s say your daughter got raped. Would you hire the rapist to provide your daughter therapy? That’s as silly as bringing in the federal government to fix the problems it created by allowing Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to make irresponsible loans under the protection of law.

Fannie Mae was created in 1938 as part of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal. The collapse of the national housing market in the wake of the Great Depression discouraged private lenders from investing in home loans. Fannie Mae was established in order to provide local banks with federal money to finance home mortgages in an attempt to raise levels of home ownership and the availability of affordable housing.

Initially, Fannie Mae operated like a national savings and loan, allowing local banks to charge low interest rates on mortgages for the benefit of the home buyer. This lead to the development of what is now known as the secondary mortgage market. Within the secondary mortgage market, companies such as Fannie Mae are able to borrow money from foreign investors at low interest rates because of the financial support that they receive from the U.S. Government. It is this ability to borrow at low rates that allows Fannie Mae to provide fixed interest rate mortgages with low down payments to home buyers. Fannie Mae makes a profit from the difference between the interest rates homeowners pay and foreign lenders charge.

Let me be bold. If this cycle of hiring the problem creator to manage the problem continues, foreign armies will one day arrive here to collect the debts we are unable to repay.

Meanwhile a retard named Steven Pearlstein prattles on about free markets with nary a glimmer of understanding.

If these actions had been taken in Moscow, Paris, Beijing or even Brasilia, they would have seemed merely confirmation of long-standing socialist instincts and traditions. But in Washington, they are revolutionary. As with the Great Depression, it has taken a full-blown financial crisis to shake the faith that free markets will always deliver better outcomes than politicians and bureaucrats.

What free market you moron? Franklin Delano Roosevelt set the stage for the socialist controlled market in 1938! The current conditions are the direct result of government interference in free markets. Your advocating more government interference is akin fighting a fire by pouring fuel on it. What the hell is wrong with you people?

It should come as no surprise that federal employees have been accused of being in bed, literally, with oil industry representatives. The nature of power almost demands such relationships exist.

WASHINGTON (CNN) — U.S. government employees received improper gifts from energy industry representatives, and engaged with them in illegal drug use and inappropriate sexual relations, according to a report issued Wednesday.

A report says government officials accepted gifts from oil and gas company employees.

The report was issued by the Interior Department’s inspector general after a $5.3 million investigation “uncovered recreational marijuana and cocaine use” by “a handful” of Interior Department staff, and found two federal employees “engaged in brief sexual relationships with representatives from companies doing business” with the department.

Two Interior Department employees “received combined gifts and gratuities on at least 135 occasions from four major oil and gas companies with whom they were doing business — a textbook example of improperly receiving gifts from prohibited sources,” Inspector General Earl Devaney says in a letter to Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne accompanying the report.

Randall Luthi, head of the Minerals Management Service at the Interior Department, said the public had not suffered financial losses as a result of the employees’ behavior.

Some of the government employees tried to hide their close association with the industry they were supposed to be regulating, the report says.

The real problem here is not that human nature is what it is. Why does no one ever ask the question that is really important: why do we accept that government can police itself? It does a terrible job. These employees will never be appropriately punished because they are part of a monopoly that naturally protects itself. Its name is the United States Federal Government.

“The Bush administration put an ‘America for Sale’ sign on the White House lawn from day one and has been courting Big Oil ever since,” Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-New York and chairwoman of the House Rules Committee, said in a written statement. “Democrats have been saying it for some time, but this proves it. This administration is literally in bed with Big Oil. Little did we know they were such a cheap date.”

Representative Louise Slaughter is a part of the problem. She cunningly points the finger at a man we all love to hate. The truth of the matter is that Democrats are just as cheap to date as Republicans. To say that either of our two parties isn’t filled with whores would be disingenuous. Many Americans, though, remain happily oblivious to the fact that the two party system is a shell game designed for just one purpose - keeping the power in government where it can be abused with impunity.

You may not have noticed, but America is in trouble. Our credit is overextended. Our military is overextended. Our welcome in the rest of the world is overextended. Civil liberties are disappearing and it’s only a matter of time before people start vanishing too. As a group, we’re getting fatter and lazier. Our political system is broken to the point that many people don’t think it can be repaired. There are not enough significant differences between the two parties in charge to matter in the long run. Both of them are driving us inexorably towards a point where we’ll either be a giant modern day version of a plantation or, depending where the technology goes, the majority of us will be converted into Solyent Green to feed the elite class. Anyone outside the two-party umbrella is marginalized or criminalized or simply ignored, depending what’s most expedient.

Jack Cafferty gets at least half of the picture.

It’s more than symbolic that when a million Americans are losing their homes to foreclosure, the Republican candidate for president has lost track of his holdings.

McCain surrounds himself with people like former Republican Sen. Phil Gramm who called America a “nation of whiners” and said we are only suffering a “mental recession.”

That’s the same problem the Republican Party has. It has lost track of what it used to stand for: small government, a disciplined fiscal policy, integrity.

In a way, the perfect storm of a rapidly changing population — old white people aren’t going to be in the majority very much longer (and isn’t that who most of the Republicans are?) — has combined with the total abdication of principles, Republican or otherwise, of arguably the worst president in the nation’s history to mark the beginning of the end of the Republican Party as we know it.

The Democrats will be in charge of both the legislative and executive branches soon. This means they’ll have some opportunities to take over the judicial again. Things will change, as they always do, but not for the better. Government doesn’t offer inspiration. Government isn’t good at hope. Government has no idea what creative vision is and it doesn’t do invention well. When all you offer as a solution to every problem is more government, then the overriding problem becomes how much government you have. We’ve reached that point.

Instead we can expect the police state to continue to grow. Concepts like zero tolerance, a “war on terror,” the continual decline of individual choices, more monitoring technologies and the ongoing dumbing down of citizens as the rise of the nanny state continues. That’s what I predict when the ball passes from the Republicans to the Democrats.

I came across a very interesting article urging me not to pay my medical bills today.

As health-care costs continue to soar, millions of confused consumers are paying medical bills they don’t actually owe. Typically this occurs when an insurance plan covers less than what a doctor, hospital, or lab service wants to be paid. The health-care provider demands the balance from the patient. Uncertain and fearing the calls of a debt collector, the patient pays up.

Most consumers don’t realize it, but this common practice, known as balance billing, often is illegal. When doctors or hospitals think an insurer has reimbursed too little, state and federal laws generally bar the medical providers from pressuring patients to pay the difference. Instead, doctors and hospitals should be wrangling directly with insurers. Economists and patient advocates estimate that consumers pay $1 billion or more a year for which they’re not responsible.

In this world where consumers and citizens are constantly urged not to take responsibility for their own lives, I find this to be an interesting conundrum.

If my insurance agency is acting as my agent, then why should I be paying the bills or spending little pieces of my life arguing about the amounts? That seems pretty logical. On the other hand, I have an obligation to pay for services rendered. Yet the provider did not spend any time explaining what the cost of the services being rendered would be.

I received a bill for eight dollars for dental services the other day showing that my insurance company did not pay and explaining that I owed the difference. I think I’ll just forward it to my insurance company - they spend all their time making me prove that I was actually treated for whatever I saw the doctor for - they’ve wasted hours of my time rejecting claims that were clearly valid. Now it’s their turn to respond to my demands.

In a world where customer service often seems to be the last thing on people’s minds, I’m going to demand more from those I do business with.

In the most misleading headlines category, we have a story about AIDS in New York City.

For the same reason, however, the report said it was impossible to determine if there was an increase in HIV infection, but suggested that in New York the infection rate was three times higher than the national average.

The headline chosen by AFP for this story is a clear indicator that modern journalism is targeted to and written by people whose cognitive function appears to max out around junior high school level or lower.

If this story had been written by a true professional interested in disseminating useful information about AIDS the headline would have been New York AIDS infection rate 3 times higher than national average.

That is the key information. This leads to the question, why does New York City have such a high rate? Three times the rate of unprotected sex with multiple partners? Three times the intravenous drug use? Three times as many gay men? In our developing idiocracy, a casual reader would have scanned the headline and come away with the impression that the AIDS virus strain in New York City is three times as virulent as elsewhere. That’s just not the case.

Shoddy journalism irritates me because it dumbs down the audience that is exposed to it.

AIDS does not spread itself. The host organism’s behavior and activities are the primary factor in the rate of spread.