[Rhodes22-list] Bob Skinner said, "

[TN Rhodey]

Term Limits - In theory I am against term limits. If one is doing a great
job for the people the people should vote in....if not they vote out. The
reality is the people are stupid and there is to much money attached to long
term incumbents. They are hard to run out and very few people vote.

Check this out....I don't know if our local stupidity hit your news (it made
the NY Times) but Knoxville voted in Term Limits a couple of years ago. Some
of the folks that would have been forced off the next ballot sued and said
the County Charter was not a valid document so nor were the term limits. It
turns out there was some type of clerical error in the initial filing of the
Knox County Charter with the State way back when. The Knox County Charter
was ruled not valid and the Term Limit ruling was overturned. So the same
people that voted for term limits then re-elected the very term limited
politicians that sued. So the election goes forward and the old guard wins.
All those that would have not been able to run due to term limit law won.
Ain't that some shit.

After the election a new court decision is rendered  and of course the
Charter is valid and so are the term limits. So the clowns that sued and won
re-election are tossed out. Is there a new election. No no no...  they are
allowed to appoint their own hand picked replacements without a new
election. So they pick whom ever they want. Several of these past officials
were then hired by their hand picked replacement and given County Jobs. We
got our new Sheriff and Court Clerk this way. So yeah I am now for term
limits.

Wally



On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 12:24 PM, Brad Haslett <flybrad at gmail.com> wrote:

> Wally,
>
> Marsha Blackburn voted against it, I'd call her office but I'm not
> sure there's a clear answer.  Buffet says the problem is real but then
> he's not a disinterested party.  The other Buffet is probably saying,
> "lets party!" I tend to lean toward getting the "toxic" assets off the
> books and give the real estate market a couple of years to digest
> everything. Being in the majority and having "control" is two
> different animals.  There's no shortage of blame to go around, that's
> for sure.  I do think that allowing any single entity to get so big
> that "it's too big to fail" is a mistake. Now would be a perfect time
> to resurrect the idea of term limits. How else can one explain Pelosi?
>
> Maybe we should just have a beauty pageant.  I think my congressman
> (Marsha) would win.
>
> Brad
>
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 10:48 AM, TN Rhodey <tnrhodey at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Ed,  It seems to me that for 6 out of the last 8 years we have had the
> right
> > control every branch of Federal Government. Selective quotes may make you
> > feel better but maybe you might want to ask why those in control of the
> > White House, Senate, and House did not rise up together and fix the
> problem?
> > Face it Ed, both sides are wearing clown paint.
> >
> > How did your guy vote on this? My local indicator is my Rep. Congressman
> Jim
> > Duncan. I know you think I am a socialist but I generally vote
> Republican.
> > I disagreed with Bush on Iraq. Things have played out pretty much as
> should
> > have been predicted. ....Anyway I vote for  Duncan every time because he
> is
> > pretty much against everything. He was one of the few on the right (or
> > left) that had the courage to break ranks with his peers and vote against
> > Iraq from day one. He is not a high profile guy, and is both fiscally and
> > socially conservative. He voted no on the bail out. My gut tells me that
> we
> > should let this whole thing ride and see just what happens. I don't trust
> > accounting changes to fix a house of cards. What is your take?
> >
> > Wally
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 11:06 AM, Brad Haslett <flybrad at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Ed,
> >>
> >> >From the WSJ today - Freddie and Fannie Mayhem
> >>
> >> Brad
> >>
> >> -------------------
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> House Financial Services Committee hearing, Sept. 10, 2003:
> >>
> >> Rep. Barney Frank (D., Mass.): I worry, frankly, that there's a
> >> tension here. The more people, in my judgment, exaggerate a threat of
> >> safety and soundness, the more people conjure up the possibility of
> >> serious financial losses to the Treasury, which I do not see. I think
> >> we see entities that are fundamentally sound financially and withstand
> >> some of the disaster scenarios. . . .
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Rep. Maxine Waters (D., Calif.), speaking to Housing and Urban
> >> Development Secretary Mel Martinez:
> >>
> >> Secretary Martinez, if it ain't broke, why do you want to fix it? Have
> >> the GSEs [government-sponsored enterprises] ever missed their housing
> >> goals?
> >> * * *
> >>
> >> House Financial Services Committee hearing, Sept. 25, 2003:
> >>
> >> Rep. Frank: I do think I do not want the same kind of focus on safety
> >> and soundness that we have in OCC [Office of the Comptroller of the
> >> Currency] and OTS [Office of Thrift Supervision]. I want to roll the
> >> dice a little bit more in this situation towards subsidized housing. .
> >> . .
> >> * * *
> >>
> >> House Financial Services Committee hearing, Sept. 25, 2003:
> >>
> >> Rep. Gregory Meeks, (D., N.Y.): . . . I am just pissed off at Ofheo
> >> [Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight] because if it wasn't
> >> for you I don't think that we would be here in the first place.
> >> [nowides]
> >> Fannie Mayhem: A History
> >>
> >> A compendium of The Wall Street Journal's recent editorial coverage of
> >> Fannie and Freddie.
> >>
> >> And Freddie Mac, who on its own, you know, came out front and
> >> indicated it is wrong, and now the problem that we have and that we
> >> are faced with is maybe some individuals who wanted to do away with
> >> GSEs in the first place, you have given them an excuse to try to have
> >> this forum so that we can talk about it and maybe change the direction
> >> and the mission of what the GSEs had, which they have done a
> >> tremendous job. . .
> >>
> >> Ofheo Director Armando Falcon Jr.: Congressman, Ofheo did not
> >> improperly apply accounting rules; Freddie Mac did. Ofheo did not try
> >> to manage earnings improperly; Freddie Mac did. So this isn't about
> >> the agency's engagement in improper conduct, it is about Freddie Mac.
> >> Let me just correct the record on that. . . . I have been asking for
> >> these additional authorities for four years now. I have been asking
> >> for additional resources, the independent appropriations assessment
> >> powers.
> >>
> >> This is not a matter of the agency engaging in any misconduct. . . .
> >>
> >> Rep. Waters: However, I have sat through nearly a dozen hearings
> >> where, frankly, we were trying to fix something that wasn't broke.
> >> Housing is the economic engine of our economy, and in no community
> >> does this engine need to work more than in mine. With last week's
> >> hurricane and the drain on the economy from the war in Iraq, we should
> >> do no harm to these GSEs. We should be enhancing regulation, not
> >> making fundamental change.
> >>
> >> Mr. Chairman, we do not have a crisis at Freddie Mac, and in
> >> particular at Fannie Mae, under the outstanding leadership of Mr.
> >> Frank Raines. Everything in the 1992 act has worked just fine. In
> >> fact, the GSEs have exceeded their housing goals. . . .
> >>
> >> Rep. Frank: Let me ask [George] Gould and [Franklin] Raines on behalf
> >> of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, do you feel that over the past years
> >> you have been substantially under-regulated?
> >>
> >> Mr. Raines?
> >>
> >> Mr. Raines: No, sir.
> >>
> >> Mr. Frank: Mr. Gould?
> >>
> >> Mr. Gould: No, sir. . . .
> >>
> >> Mr. Frank: OK. Then I am not entirely sure why we are here. . . .
> >>
> >> Rep. Frank: I believe there has been more alarm raised about potential
> >> unsafety and unsoundness than, in fact, exists.
> >> * * *
> >>
> >> Senate Banking Committee, Oct. 16, 2003:
> >>
> >> Sen. Charles Schumer (D., N.Y.): And my worry is that we're using the
> >> recent safety and soundness concerns, particularly with Freddie, and
> >> with a poor regulator, as a straw man to curtail Fannie and Freddie's
> >> mission. And I don't think there is any doubt that there are some in
> >> the administration who don't believe in Fannie and Freddie altogether,
> >> say let the private sector do it. That would be sort of an ideological
> >> position.
> >>
> >> Mr. Raines: But more importantly, banks are in a far more risky
> >> business than we are.
> >> * * *
> >>
> >> Senate Banking Committee, Feb. 24-25, 2004:
> >>
> >> Sen. Thomas Carper (D., Del.): What is the wrong that we're trying to
> >> right here? What is the potential harm that we're trying to avert?
> >>
> >> Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan: Well, I think that that is a
> >> very good question, senator.
> >>
> >> What we're trying to avert is we have in our financial system right
> >> now two very large and growing financial institutions which are very
> >> effective and are essentially capable of gaining market shares in a
> >> very major market to a large extent as a consequence of what is
> >> perceived to be a subsidy that prevents the markets from adjusting
> >> appropriately, prevents competition and the normal adjustment
> >> processes that we see on a day-by-day basis from functioning in a way
> >> that creates stability. . . . And so what we have is a structure here
> >> in which a very rapidly growing organization, holding assets and
> >> financing them by subsidized debt, is growing in a manner which really
> >> does not in and of itself contribute to either home ownership or
> >> necessarily liquidity or other aspects of the financial markets. . . .
> >>
> >> Sen. Richard Shelby (R., Ala.): [T]he federal government has [an]
> >> ambiguous relationship with the GSEs. And how do we actually get rid
> >> of that ambiguity is a complicated, tricky thing. I don't know how we
> >> do it.
> >>
> >> I mean, you've alluded to it a little bit, but how do we define the
> >> relationship? It's important, is it not?
> >>
> >> Mr. Greenspan: Yes. Of all the issues that have been discussed today,
> >> I think that is the most difficult one. Because you cannot have, in a
> >> rational government or a rational society, two fundamentally different
> >> views as to what will happen under a certain event. Because it invites
> >> crisis, and it invites instability. . .
> >>
> >> Sen. Christopher Dodd (D., Conn.): I, just briefly will say, Mr.
> >> Chairman, obviously, like most of us here, this is one of the great
> >> success stories of all time. And we don't want to lose sight of that
> >> and [what] has been pointed out by all of our witnesses here,
> >> obviously, the 70% of Americans who own their own homes today, in no
> >> small measure, due because of the work that's been done here. And that
> >> shouldn't be lost in this debate and discussion. . . .
> >> * * *
> >>
> >> Senate Banking Committee, April 6, 2005:
> >>
> >> Sen. Schumer: I'll lay my marker down right now, Mr. Chairman. I think
> >> Fannie and Freddie need some changes, but I don't think they need
> >> dramatic restructuring in terms of their mission, in terms of their
> >> role in the secondary mortgage market, et cetera. Change some of the
> >> accounting and regulatory issues, yes, but don't undo Fannie and
> >> Freddie.
> >> * * *
> >>
> >> Senate Banking Committee, June 15, 2006:
> >>
> >> Sen. Robert Bennett (R., Utah): I think we do need a strong regulator.
> >> I think we do need a piece of legislation. But I think we do need also
> >> to be careful that we don't overreact.
> >>
> >> I know the press, particularly, keeps saying this is another Enron,
> >> which it clearly is not. Fannie Mae has taken its lumps. Fannie Mae is
> >> paying a very large fine. Fannie Mae is under a very, very strong
> >> microscope, which it needs to be. . . . So let's not do nothing, and
> >> at the same time, let's not overreact. . .
> >>
> >> Sen. Jack Reed (D., R.I.): I think a lot of people are being
> >> opportunistic, . . . throwing out the baby with the bathwater, saying,
> >> "Let's dramatically restructure Fannie and Freddie," when that is not
> >> what's called for as a result of what's happened here. . . .
> >>
> >> Sen. Chuck Hagel (R., Neb.): Mr. Chairman, what we're dealing with is
> >> an astounding failure of management and board responsibility, driven
> >> clearly by self interest and greed. And when we reference this issue
> >> in the context of -- the best we can say is, "It's no Enron." Now,
> >> that's a hell of a high standard.
> >>
> >> On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 8:41 AM, Tootle <ekroposki at charter.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Bob Skinner said, "I must admit that I will not be satisfied with any
> >> > solution that does not severely penalize those who
> >> > sat on top of this pile of paper with their golden
> >> > parachutes.  The very existence of the parachutes
> >> > is evidence that they had no confidence that the
> >> > market would survive their mismanagement.
> >> >
> >> > And I know that I have a lot of company in that
> >> > sentiment.
> >> >
> >> > Those of us who believe in good pay for good work
> >> > are bent beyond tolerance by the obvious disregard
> >> > for merit in determining executive pay at the top.
> >> > A double standard if I ever saw one, the antithesis
> >> > of the classless society we flaunt to the rest of
> >> > the world.
> >> >
> >> > I smell revolution - bloodless, I hope, but
> >> > nevertheless with sharp teeth and a great hunger
> >> > for revenge.
> >> >
> >> > As the French once said, heads will roll.  And
> >> > the first will be those of the legislators who do
> >> > not enact appropriate penalties and limitations
> >> > during the process of rebuilding our financial
> >> > structure.
> >> >
> >> > There should be no free ride for either the
> >> > lenders who made ill-advised loans, or the fools
> >> > who took the money and mis-spent it.
> >> >
> >> > /Robert
> >> >
> >> > What Bob Skinner DID NOT SAY:
> >> >
> >> > Here is a quick look into 3 former Fannie Mae executives who have
> brought
> >> > down Wall Street.
> >> >
> >> > Franklin Raines was a Chairman and Chief Executive Officer at Fannie
> Mae.
> >> > Raines was forced to retire from his position with Fannie Mae  when
> >> auditing
> >> > discovered severe irregulaties in Fannie Mae's accounting activities.
> At
> >> the
> >> > time of his departure The Wall Street Journal noted, " Raines, who
> long
> >> > defended the company's accounting despite mounting evidence that it
> >> wasn't
> >> > proper, issued a statement late Tuesday conceding that "mistakes were
> >> made"
> >> > and saying he would assume responsibility as he had earlier promised.
> >> News
> >> > reports indicate the company was under growing pressure from
> regulators
> >> to
> >> > shake up its management in the wake of findings that the company's
> books
> >> ran
> >> > afoul of generally accepted accounting principles for four years."
> >>  Fannie
> >> > Mae had to reduce its surplus by $9 billion.
> >> >
> >> > Raines left with a "golden parachute valued at $240 Million in
> benefits.
> >> The
> >> > Government filed suit against Raines when the depth of the accounting
> >> > scandal became clear.
> http://housingdoom.com/2006/12/18/fannie-charges/.
> >> > The Government noted, "The 101 charges reveal how the individuals
> >> improperly
> >> > manipulated earnings to maximize their bonuses, while knowingly
> >> neglecting
> >> > accounting systems and internal controls, misapplying over twenty
> >> accounting
> >> > principles and misleading the regulator and the public. The Notice
> >> explains
> >> > how they submitted six years of misleading and inaccurate accounting
> >> > statements and inaccurate capital reports that enabled them to grow
> >> Fannie
> >> > Mae in an unsafe and unsound manner."  These charges were made in
> 2006.
> >>  The
> >> > Court ordered Raines to return $50 Million Dollars he received in
> bonuses
> >> > based on the miss-stated Fannie Mae profits.
> >> >
> >> > Tim Howard -  Was the Chief Financial Officer of Fannie Mae. Howard
> "was
> >> a
> >> > strong internal proponent of using accounting strategies that would
> >> ensure a
> >> > "stable pattern of earnings" at Fannie. In everyday English - he was
> >> cooking
> >> > the books.  The Government Investigation determined that, "Chief
> >> Financial
> >> > Officer, Tim Howard, failed to provide adequate oversight to key
> control
> >> and
> >> > reporting functions within Fannie Mae,"
> >> >
> >> > On June 16, 2006, Rep. Richard Baker, R-La., asked the Justice
> Department
> >> to
> >> > investigate his allegations that two former Fannie Mae executives lied
> to
> >> > Congress in October 2004 when they denied manipulating the
> >> mortgage-finance
> >> > giant's income statement to achieve management pay bonuses.
> >> Investigations
> >> > by federal regulators and the company's board of directors since
> >> concluded
> >> > that management did manipulate 1998 earnings to trigger bonuses.
> Raines
> >> and
> >> > Howard resigned under pressure in late 2004.
> >> > Howard's Golden Parachute was estimated at $20 Million!
> >> >
> >> > Jim Johnson -   A former executive at Lehman Brothers and who was
> later
> >> > forced from his position as Fannie Mae CEO.   A look at the Office of
> >> > Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight's May 2006 report on
> mismanagement
> >> and
> >> > corruption inside Fannie Mae, and you'll see some interesting things
> >> about
> >> > Johnson. Investigators found that Fannie Mae had hidden a substantial
> >> amount
> >> > of Johnson's 1998 compensation from the public, reporting that it was
> >> > between $6 million and $7 million when it fact it was $21 million."
> >> > Johnson is currently under investigation for taking illegal loans from
> >> > Countrywide while serving as CEO of Fannie Mae.
> >> >
> >> > Johnson's Golden Parachute was estimated at $28 Million.
> >> >
> >> > WHERE ARE THEY NOW?
> >> >
> >> > FRANKLIN RAINES? Raines works for the Obama Campaign as Chief Economic
> >> > Advisor
> >> > TIM HOWARD?  Howard is also a Chief Economic Advisor to Obama
> >> > JIM JOHNSON?  Johnson hired as a Senior Obama Finance Advisor and was
> >> > selected to run Obama's Vice Presidential Search Committee[until
> public
> >> > clamor]
> >> >
> >> > IF OBAMA PLANS ON CLEANING UP THE MESS - HIS ADVISORS HAVE THE
> EXPERTISE
> >> -
> >> > THEY MADE THE MESS IN THE FIRST PLACE.   Would you trust the men who
> tore
> >> > Wall Street down to build the New Wall Street ?
> >> >
> >> > Pay close attention because should Obama be elected you will see more
> of
> >> > these three, if they are not indicted,. tried and incarcerated.
> >> >
> >> > Ed K
> >> > Greenville, SC, USA
> >> > attachment:
> >> >
> http://www.nabble.com/file/p19779478/Peter%2Band%2BBen.jpgPeter+and+Ben.jpg
> >> > --
> >> > View this message in context:
> >> http://www.nabble.com/Bob-Skinner-said%2C-%22-tp19779478p19779478.html
> >> > Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >> >
> >> > __________________________________________________
> >> > To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
> >> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
> >> > __________________________________________________
> >> >
> >> __________________________________________________
> >> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
> >> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
> >> __________________________________________________
> >>
> > __________________________________________________
> > To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
> > __________________________________________________
> >
> __________________________________________________
> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
> __________________________________________________
>