One of the many unknowns is a clear definition of exactly what assets the government would be buying. Mortage contracts for properties currently in active foreclosure? Actual real estate already seized by the mortgagor? Mortgages that are in default but not in forclosure proceedings? Something else? Just a mess of paper?

In other words, are we buying into the original bet that a mortgage represents, or are we buying into a bet on that bet?

If the government is buying control of a bunch of properties and mortgages, it seems like it could do much to soften the terms of the mortages to make them viable. If it's getting actual properties, it has the long-term financial ability to use them to manipulate the housing market for the better.

But it doesn't sound like that's what's happening.

Posted at September 28, 2008 7:16 PM in response to Bailout -- Part 3, The Legislation

That depends on the debates. In the past they haven't even slightly resembled real debates but were more like joint press conferences. The question is, will candidates get to question each other with followup? If not the "debates" will be irrelevant.

Posted at September 14, 2008 3:22 PM in response to NYT: Palin Personally Sought To Ban Book From Library

I pretty much dropped the TPM habit a year or so ago because the technology made it a waste of time to do anything more than read the front page. Checked back today and it's the same damn thing only worse than ever.

Andrew Golis was doing pretty much the same promises back then, too. I don't buy the conspiracy theories or the money theories, but there are obviously people making decisions here who are still struggling to master the IBM selectric typewriter, or maybe even stuck their toe into BBSes once or twice.

As any random browser click will show, this site uses, and insists on keeping on using, the worst website software on the planet. All I want to know from Andrew is WHY??? I'll check back in a year or two if I get nostalgic for the 19th Century.

Posted at September 10, 2008 7:10 PM in response to Worst. Site. Ever.

I pretty much dropped the TPM habit a year or so ago because the technology made it a waste of time to do anything more than read the front page. Checked back today and it's the same damn thing only worse than ever.

Andrew Golis was doing pretty much the same promises back then, too. I don't buy the conspiracy theories or the money theories, but there are obviously people making decisions here who are still struggling to master the IBM selectric typewriter, or maybe even stuck their toe into BBSes once or twice.

As any random browser click will show, this site uses, and insists on keeping on using, the worst website software on the planet. All I want to know from Andrew is WHY??? I'll check back in a year or two if I get nostalgic for the 19th Century.

Posted at September 10, 2008 7:05 PM in response to Worst. Site. Ever.

Nope. Too off the point.

The trick is to put it back on McCain and put a wedge between him and the Clinton dead-enders:

"If John McCain is really so outraged about saying "lipstick on a pig", how come that's exactly what he said about Hillary Clinton? Or did he forget that, too?"

Posted at September 10, 2008 4:55 PM in response to Suggested Push-Back On Lipstick-Gate

Nope. Too off the point.

The trick is to put it back on McCain and put a wedge between him and the Clinton dead-enders:

"If John McCain is really so outraged about saying "lipstick on a pig", how come that's exactly what he said about Hillary Clinton? Or did he forget that, too?"

Posted at September 10, 2008 4:52 PM in response to Suggested Push-Back On Lipstick-Gate

Time to take off the gloves and get those 727 ads up. "John McCain hates that Obama worked to help schoolchildren protect themselves against pedophiles. Why would John McCain want to protect sexual predators from children? Only John McCain knows for sure."

Posted at September 9, 2008 7:41 PM in response to New McCain Ad Falsely Suggests Obama Wants Kids To Learn "About Sex Before Learning To Read"

So are the Dems targeting her this election? Surely she makes even the dumbest of Minnesotans burn with shame at being represented by a complete moron. Shouldn't be that hard to beat her.

Posted at July 21, 2008 5:26 PM in response to Another GOP Oil-Drilling Myth Is Born!

Working won't be enough. Only voting against a bill with immunity in it will be enough.

Looks like what he's been talking about all this time is just pocket change. Which is probably what he'll be getting from party activists from now on if he votes for immunity. Maybe he swore off fed election assistance too soon.

Posted at June 20, 2008 4:04 PM in response to Obama Backing FISA "Compromise"

What makes you think it will be 214 more days? With "leadership" like this, we'll have Bush in the White House and cowards running Congress no matter who wins in November. How many more times do we let ourselves get scammed by mealymouth scum like Hoyer and Pelosi? At least the Republicans are pretty much upfront in their desire to destroy American democracy.

I put in a lot of time helping Dems get control of Congress. It was a total waste. Never again.

Posted at June 20, 2008 1:38 PM in response to NEW FISA LAW PASSED