Terrorists hijack a plane? The federal government takes over airport security. Bear Stearns makes bad loans? The federal government rewards their idiocy with $29 billion. The biggest voting bloc hits old-age? The federal government decides to pay for their prescription drugs. The Bush administration's socialism, generally seeing the federal government as a safety net for corporations and the middle class, is disturbing. Now the Bush administration is debating whether to put Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, two companies already too tied in with government, into a conservatorship. In other words, what took more than thirty years to accomplish--the semi-privatization of the New Deal relic Fannie Mae in 1970--George W. Bush is contemplating reversing. Perversely, companies that partake in reckless business practices get rewarded with billions of federal dollars--undoubtedly encouraging future recklessness. As the New York Times puts it, "Under a conservatorship, the shares of Fannie and Freddie would be worth little or nothing, and any losses on mortgages they own or guarantee--which could be staggering--would be paid by taxpayers." A bad deal, not for Fannie and Freddie, but for Fannie and Freddie Taxpayer.

Please don't call me Fannie. It's a bit embarrassing.

This is just unbelievable! It's understandable that those in government love their cushy high paying gigs and not only want to keep them but would love to create more cushy high paying gigs for as many people as possible thus perpetuating the gravy train. But this is America and it was built on private enterprises having the freedoms to succeed or fail as the market would dictate.

As much as we know about how socialism doesn't work, it amazes me how our leaders disregard that fact and move ever closer to it.

Worst president _ever_.

The funny thing about this is - If a denocrat were in the white house and the same thing happened the conservative press would be screaming bloodly murder. But since it's Repub GWB - all this rates is a Flynn posting and 3 minor comments.

Maybe because a majority of the media are in the tank for the Democrats and they would agree with government taking over as much as possible. This is only news to conservatives who would prefer government out of as much as possible and who still find it hard to believe that there isn't much difference between Bush and your run of the mill Democrat.

Your email address should be @AndroidsDungeon.com. A REAL comic book store guy would know that.

Media in the tank for the Democrats? You mean like Foxnews, The WSJ, The Washington Times and NY Post?

Ok. You named four out of 400. Try again. And I'm happy to say that the WSJ is finally coming back into the fold since Murdoch took over. Before that, they were not completely but leaning kind of left.

Strikes me funny too when libs link the WSJ with conservatives exclusively as big bad old business is supposed to be a wholly owned subsidiary of the GOP/Conservatives. Most libs still like to mask the fact that there are more limousine liberals who are filthy rich and didn't get that way developing wind farms.

Question: why are the House and Senate Banking Committees run by Democrats? Scary.