Thursday, January 17, 2013

A Newtered Explanation

Has anybody ever taken the time to try and ascertain just exactly what it was that New Gingrich did for Freddie Mac to earn that $1.8 billion? I mean, I know that he says that he was some sort company historian and all, and that it was totally above-board but, come on, a seven figure "salary" for what couldn't have been more than a handful of hours a week - does that even remotely pass the smell-test? I say audit the sucker completely and, while they're at it, they should probably take a good long look at the FED, Fannie Mae, the Pentagon, and the Department of Homeland Security, too....Company historian LOL!.......................................................................................P.S. Just for the record here, officials at Freddie Mac continue to say that Gingrich never did any lobbying for them. Hm, I'm not entirely certain if that statement passes the smell-test, either. New Gingrich, the Al Gore of the right.
Posted by at

7 comments:

dmarks said...

Fannie and Freddie are themselves major problems in so many ways. Keynsian monstrosities that are entirely unnecessary, except of course to the government employees at the top raking in tens of millions a year from it. And it was instrumental in implementing Andrew Cuomo's terrible housing ideas, thus causing the economic collapse.

January 18, 2013 at 5:17 AM
Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

And it was 2 of the supposedly crazy guys, Ron Paul and Peter Schiff, who not only predicted it but predicted it to a letter. Go figure, huh?

January 18, 2013 at 10:30 AM
BB-Idaho said...

Gingrich v Gore: IMO one talks too fast and the other too slow.
In Gore's case, it sure sounds like he took elocution
lessons from Jeff Goldblum ..

January 18, 2013 at 1:29 PM
dmarks said...

Fannie and Freddie are pretty much intact, a time bomb waiting to go off again. And the people at the top of it are still being paid massive amounts. You'd think there was no debt problem at all.

How would you like to get paid millions to run a government agency that is really entirely unnecessary, and which had a major role in running the US economy off the cliff?

I agree with those that want it entirely privatized. But if that is done, it should be broken up into many entirely separate smaller companies, with a prohibition for several years against them merging with each other (cue an image of the busted up T-1000 in "Terminator 2" re-forming or merging with other companies. We need decentralization. I don't buy in the "too big to fail" concept, but regardless, having small institutions avoids this problem.

January 18, 2013 at 1:59 PM
Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

BB, I love Darrel Hammond's impersonation of Gore. Side-splitting!......dmarks, I actually think that all of the big banks should probably be broken up and surprisingly the Wall Street Journal's Steven Moore thinks so, too.

January 18, 2013 at 4:19 PM
dmarks said...

Will: About Hammond, he was great as Gore. And about Will Ferrell? I am rather unhappy with him for doing as much damage as one person could possibly do to one of my favorite science fiction franchies. But I loved his GWB impersonation.

"Mandate? I think I had one of those in college".

As for breaking up the big private banks, I don't think they would be huge to begin with without government intervention. Government regulation and intrusion in the free market is the prime cause of monopoly and consolidation/centralization.

January 18, 2013 at 7:56 PM
Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

That's one of the things that the progressives don't seem to understand. Big business loves regulation. a) Only they can afford the compliance and b) it's often them (through their lobbyists) who help to craft the legislation. Philip Morris and the tobacco bill - perfect example.

January 18, 2013 at 8:24 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)