Let me get this right. It's wrong to manhandle a black, a woman or a journalist, especially if done by someone in government. If this happens, groups like NOW, the ACLU and the NAACP rush to protest, decrying her loss of civil rights. Except Obama is president, so it becomes acceptable. Not one chirp from Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton or the national media. My, these rules of when to get outraged are complicated.

I like GM cars...I have a Grand Prix and a Trailblazer...and in a few years wanted to buy a Vibe (apparently won't be happening), but if bankruptcy and the complete annialation of GM and/or Chrysler and/or Ford is what it takes to get rid of the UAW, as far as I'm concerned, it can't happen fast enough.

Oh, I get what Joe Biden was talking about when he said that Obama had resolve. In the face of No Korea's latest threat, Obama was resolved to ignore it and rush forward with his plans for an activist Supreme Court nominee.

So the state of California can't figure out how to pay its own way, maybe the taxpayers of Massachusetts (and the other 48 states) won't mind paying California's bills. Strach nevasse.

The grand, exalted, almighty, omnipotent federal government can't figure out how to pay its own way, either - get ready for a VAT. Remember, the lord and master Obama's promise not to raise taxes on us poor peons by "one thin dime" - nope, no lie, he's going for all the dimes, nickels, pennies, quarters, dollars -the BIG bucks!

Why is it that the states hardest hit by the recession are also the states that have gotten the fewest dollars in stimulus? We didn't kiss enough -insert 3 letter word meaning "beast of burden normally ridden into town on religious feast days".

My elected representatives in Washington did a magnificent job of spending money I haven't earned yet on a stimulus package - and an absolutely lousy job of getting some of it spent in MY state. I'm mad at them for spending the money foolishly, and I'm madder for them not bringing enough of that pork back home.

Hey, BO - quit riding around in OUR airplane (Our Farce Wan) when going out to raise funds.

I'm so glad the federal gubmint is going to own 76 trombones - er, 72 percent of GM - after screwing me out of retirement money by blowing off GM's bond obligations. Change I can believe in - "chump change"

Climate change: how arrogant that a bunch of "scientists" with 200 years of empirical data and a computer model can predict what the climate of a 4.5 billion year old planet should be.

I can no longer read these assignments, Neal. They sound like jokes from SNL.

Didn't the Germans do something like this back in the 1940's? But the 'guns' were Jews?

Maybe he played roulette to fund the government...always bet on black.

The US backing loans is not worthless and does not equal the scenario you suggested. But, it does represent some other issues that may make it not worth it.

What CA is asking for is exactly what should have happened with residential lending. Everyone must understand that banks do not warehouse these loans on most occasions. They sell them again on the secondary market. The reason lending dried up was because of no confidence in the mortgage backed security. Maybe because the note was a subprime loan or because there were too much risks for default. Because of this, banks who made loans expecting them to sell to investors ended up holding on to all these depreciating assets on their balance sheets. Now the banks are in trouble because the notes are higher than the equity securing the debt.

All of this was a catalyst for the collapse of the market. But also got rid of all affordable lending. TARP attempted to throw money at the problem in order to make the market liquid again. Thats absurd! And obviously didn't turn out that way.

Now, if the government would sponsor a new affordable mortgage product backed by the government, this would give investors confidence in the security for the to buy it again on the secondary market. It would also improve lending capacity and sponsor more new home sales. This would accommodate the "buyer's market" we all love to talk about. The more affordable loans, the more buyers. The more buyers, the more sales. The more sales, the more comparable sales driving up demand and thus driving up home prices. Resulting in appreciation.

The government wouldn't be funding the loans. They would be warrantying them. This would likely cost less than half of what has already been spent for TARP. And is a feasible cost effective solution for naturally creating demand in the market place, reducing debt and increasing consumer wealth.

If the government would have done this 6 months ago, we would be getting dramatically different economic reports by now. And would be forecasting an end to the recession by mid 2010.

The Federal Gov't backing loans is worthless. If I tell everyone I'll give them money, eventually people realize my word is worthless. For the first time in my life, I am truly ashamed of my country.