It’s about to get harder to buy a home
Why getting a mortgage will be trickier and costlier in 2014
Consumers shopping for a home might want to
pick up the pace: Getting a mortgage will likely become more challenging and
costly next year.
Loan limits for popular mortgages are
scheduled to drop in January, according to a Wall Street Journal report this
week. The Federal Housing Finance Agency is planning to slash the maximum size
of mortgages eligible to be backed by Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac, which currently run as high as $417,000 in most
parts of the country and up to $625,500 in pricier cities, including New York
and San Francisco. That same month, new mortgage rules by the Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau go into effect, which restrict the types of mortgages lenders
can provide. The changes could leave next year’s mortgage applicants with fewer
and more expensive financing options to choose from than what’s currently
available, experts say. “If you’re comfortable with what you can get this year,
lock it in,” says John Vogel, adjunct professor of real estate at the Tuck
School of Business at Dartmouth
College. “Most rules that will come are in fact going to be less
favorable to borrowers.”
Andy Dean Photography / Shutterstock.com
This all comes as the government tries to reduce its role
in the mortgage market. During the second quarter, two out of three mortgages
were funded by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, according to Inside Mortgage Finance,
a trade publication. By lowering the loan sizes backed by these agencies,
regulators are hoping that lenders will step in to pick up the mortgage
applicants who are impacted and that a private market for purchasing these loans
— which basically disappeared in 2008 — will reopen. There has been some growth
in private mortgage financing recently, though it remains small compared with
pre-recession advances in the space. Just 2.1% of mortgages originated in April
were sold to private investors, while roughly 90% were purchased by government
agencies, according to Lender Processing Services, a mortgage-data tracking
firm.
But lower loan sizes could shut some applicants out. The
FHFA hasn’t announced how much Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s cap will drop, but
their larger-size mortgages are commonly used by home buyers in cities with
expensive real estate. These buyers often have relatively small down payments
and few assets. In contrast, most private mortgages are currently being given to
wealthy borrowers who have hefty down payments for multi-million-dollar homes.
It’s unclear whether the market will open up to lower net worth borrowers who
suddenly fall below government-backed loan thresholds, and if it does, what
rates they’ll be charged. Complicating matters, new CFPB mortgage rules set to
go into effect in January could limit the kinds of loans available in the
private mortgage market. Also see: Is it too easy to get a mortgage?
MORE IN PERSONAL FINANCE AND RETIREMENT
• It’s about to get harder to buy a home
• Budget talks could alter 401(k), IRA rules
• Even Ivy Leaguers default on student loans
• Did Apple just kill the John Hancock?
• Apple fans stick with original 2007 iPhone
• Obamacare explained in plain English
/conga/story/misc/personal_finance.html
278893
• It’s about to get harder to buy a home
• Budget talks could alter 401(k), IRA rules
• Even Ivy Leaguers default on student loans
• Did Apple just kill the John Hancock?
• Apple fans stick with original 2007 iPhone
• Obamacare explained in plain English
Would-be home buyers who are planning to get a mortgage
that’s close to the Fannie and Freddie caps might want to consider getting the
loan before the year ends. An FHFA spokesperson says that the agency will
announce any changes “with adequate advance notice.”
Once these changes take effect, borrowers who no longer
qualify for Fannie and Freddie mortgages could face the following setbacks.
Harder to find a mortgage
Most applicants who get shut out of Fannie Mae and Freddie
Mac loans will have to turn to the private market. Private lenders, include many
banks, credit unions and independent mortgage lenders, originate mortgages under
their own terms and in most cases hold the loans on their books. Most are very
selective, seeking out affluent borrowers who present little risk of default.
“The concern will now be for less well-qualified borrowers who [will] fall above
the loan size limitations,” says Stuart Gabriel, director of the Ziman Center
for Real Estate at the University
of California, Los Angeles.
Borrowers could also have a difficult time qualifying for
a private mortgage since many lenders require at least 25% to 30% down. With
Fannie and Freddie mortgages, borrowers can put down 20%; smaller down payments
are accepted, but borrowers must pay mortgage insurance.
Adjustable rates as the only option
Applicants who qualify for private mortgages could find
that adjustable-rate home loans are their only option. Tom Wind, executive vice
president of residential and consumer lending at national lender EverBank, says
many lenders who keep these loans on their books are more interested in offering
ARMs than fixed-rate mortgages. When the Federal Reserve raises rates, banks
will have to increase the rates they pay out on deposit accounts, but they’ll
receive larger interest payments from ARM borrowers whose rates reset at that
time and will likely be higher then.
With ARMs, borrowers have a fixed rate for a set period
of time – often five years – before rates become variable. ARM origination in
the private market is already on the rise: They accounted for 27.3% of mortgages
originated and sold to private investors in June, up from 23.2% in the beginning
of the year, according to LPS.
Federal officials are preparing to reduce the maximum size of home-mortgage loans eligible for backing by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, a move that is likely to face resistance from some lawmakers and the real estate industry. Nick Timiraos reports. Photo: AP.
Higher interest
rates
Private mortgages tend to charge higher interest rates
than Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac-backed loans. But increased lender appetite for
private mortgages has helped lower their rates, which are hovering near and in
some cases lower than rates on government-backed mortgages. (Historically,
private mortgages had higher rates.)
It’s unclear whether rates will rise if more borrowers
enter this market. While an increase in demand could cause rates to move higher,
the opposite could occur if the secondary mortgage market takes off, says Stu
Feldstein, president at mortgage-research firm SMR Research.
Fewer choices in the private market
Though small in number, some lenders have been offering
low-income documentation mortgages and interest-only mortgages to affluent
borrowers and holding those loans on their books. The CFPB’s new mortgage rules
that kick in next year will offer more protection from lawsuits to lenders who
avoid these mortgages. Lenders who want this legal protection also won’t be able
to approve borrowers for mortgages if their total monthly debt is over 43% of
their monthly pre-tax income. These changes could result in fewer loan options
at the same time that more borrowers enter this space.
More News In
Personal
Finance Suggested Stories
-
You’re getting a 2.9% raise next year (MarketWatch - Personal Finance)
-
Putin says Russia will assist Syria if attacked (MarketWatch - Economy & Politics)
-
Why your mutual fund portfolio has done so badly (MarketWatch - Other)
-
George Zimmerman in police custody: reports (MarketWatch - Other)
-
Iran plans revenge on U.S. if Syria is attacked (MarketWatch - Economy & Politics)
-
The gold rush is over. Time to buy? (MarketWatch - Personal Finance)
Content from our Sponsors
-
Not All Fats Are Created Equal - 5 Fats to Eat For a Healthy Heart (Healthy Starts Made Simple)
-
The Five Year Rule for Buying a House (Moneyning.com)
-
Don’t Believe These 3 Mortgage Myths (Moneyning.com)
Video »
Monster Shrimp Invade U.S. Coastal
Waters
(WSJ.com: Live)
Opinion: James Taranto on
'counter-Trayvonism'
(WSJ.com: Live)
Mercedes-Benz S550: Soon to Be the
'Best Car in the World'?
(WSJ.com: Live)
Cleveland Kidnapper, Ariel Castro,
Has Died
(WSJ.com: Live)
Monster Shrimp Invade U.S. Coastal
Waters
(WSJ.com: Live)
Opinion: James Taranto on
'counter-Trayvonism'
(WSJ.com: Live)
Mercedes-Benz S550: Soon to Be the
'Best Car in the World'?
(WSJ.com: Live)
Cleveland Kidnapper, Ariel Castro,
Has Died
(WSJ.com: Live)
Story Conversation
Commenting FAQs »
181 comments
810 people
listening
FHA will always be there for the lower income borrower. the only ones
effected are the 417000 to 625,000. the jumbo market loans above 625,000 are
sold off, currently. The banks will bring jumbo back down to 417,000 again. and
citi will buy the servicing on all those loans too. The only effect that is
going to happen is; home prices will drop back down to 1998 values, More cities
will file bankruptcy since their tax bases will fall off of a cliff. The stock
market will crash with people pulling money out of their 401-ks. people won't be
able to do loan mods since the government won't be controlling the loans. Life
will go on and people will start living within their means.
When the government is backstopping over 90% of mortgages, you know something
is VERY SICK with the market. But you have a bunch of cowards who want to keep
these overpriced valuations afloat rather than allowing prices to adjust to what
the market can bear. The young generations will pay dearly.
I think that it makes sense to drop the limit. Freddy & Fannie were set
up to help 1st time buyers. Something is wrong if 1st time buyers are buying
$417,000+ in house even in expensive housing markets. Either the borrowers are
in good financial shape & do not need that boost or they are just buying too
much house & are a risk to the government & themselves.
We have gotten out of one housing bubble, I see no reason to keep subsidies to create a new bubble.
We have gotten out of one housing bubble, I see no reason to keep subsidies to create a new bubble.
So the government will stop stimulating housing recovery? or they want to
scare people into buying?
I bought a house in 2011 and no problem getting a conventional loan with 10%
down on a single income.
So I am very leery about people who say the lending market is against people who can afford a home.
So I am very leery about people who say the lending market is against people who can afford a home.
Get in now while the going is good!!
Do not listen to the Debbie Downers!!
Buy, Buy, Buy!!
Do not listen to the Debbie Downers!!
Buy, Buy, Buy!!
@Daniel,
Yes, they said the same thing around 2007, just before the housing market crashed.
The only way you can be a pretty good salesman/ banker is optimizing your own gains as you said. When you ask the same question to your client, the answer is so good.
You might as well say that you're a pretty good con man. what is the difference?
Yes, they said the same thing around 2007, just before the housing market crashed.
The only way you can be a pretty good salesman/ banker is optimizing your own gains as you said. When you ask the same question to your client, the answer is so good.
You might as well say that you're a pretty good con man. what is the difference?
Removing government stimulus from the housing market GRADUALLY starting with
the most expensive homes is the direction to go. This makes
sense.
I would hope this is actually the start of Freddie and Fannie Mae unwinding
from its position of monopoly to let the market actually find its own
ground.
Living on the coast of FLA, NC, SC, GA will get you the same things for about
1/4 the price and without all the fruits and nuts.
@Joseph
Vance Yes but how many Googles, Apples, Facebooks, Intels and
Microsofts have they created? None....
Maybe we need a few fruits and nuts after all.....
Maybe we need a few fruits and nuts after all.....
@David Bowles @Joseph Vance Why do dummy Californians pay $500k for a small
2 bedroom house? It is big enough for selling cracks right?
So David you are saying everyone who worked in Silicon Vally was a native
Californian? I really doubt that. Hell 90% of the native popullation is either
stoned or drunk 24/7
Housing fell apart for a lot of reasons mainly because fewer and fewer people
could afford even a modest home at the prices they were priced and no one could
ever save enough money for the down payments required as wages stagnated, so
this is what you get everyone trying to fix a problem from the top down without
trying to figure out how to get good paying jobs back in the country,
why?Because it’s always easier to throw money at a problem than to try and
correct it,Why? because it’s cheaper than trying to train everyone (because the
reality is even if you get the education and are trained) there are still no
jobs out there and if there are they don’t pay squat.So if your goal is to live
the American dream, the people who post on this site would tell you work harder,
live in their rental properties and make them richer, pay all the taxes (as
you’re the one the taxes are for), don’t ask them to play by the same rules,
that’s class warfare, and don’t stop dreaming even if you know there’s not a
snowballs chance you can ever achieve it.
@James Edwards Your main point, that fewer people couldn't afford even a
modest home is not the fault of stagnant wages bur rather artificially
stimulated home prices; the homes were valued much higher than they should have
been. This was the creation of the federal reserve having interest rates too low
after the dot com crash. A lot of factors went into making the problem worse but
I feel like you're missing the main culprit-The Fed. I enjoy your sentiment
though, feels like you're on the same side of the fence, I would just direct my
anger elsewhere.
"homes were valued much higher than they should have been" - Yes, in some
markets because of rampant speculation, but in most is is because material and
labor costs for building a new home have increased substantially. In alot of
areas of the country, the housing prices HAVE to rise from where they are now.
Including myself, there are a number of folks I know where the replacement value
to insure the house is 50% or more higher than the appraised value.
Face it- the real estate "recovery" and economic recovery are OVER
Mortgage apps are down to five year low and real estate is supposed to lead the recovery?
More Here on why the recovery is over: http://smaulgld.com/the-recovery-has-reversed-course-welcome-to-the-revocery/
Mortgage apps are down to five year low and real estate is supposed to lead the recovery?
More Here on why the recovery is over: http://smaulgld.com/the-recovery-has-reversed-course-welcome-to-the-revocery/
You think this is hard? Wait until the the government runs out money (cannot
print anymore) and true market rate appears! Did I say double digit
rates?
A good house can be bought for under 200k where I live, so I don't see loan
limits impacting me or most other Americans who chose to live where housing is
still priced within sanity. I already have a mortgage with a credit union and
they don't offer an ARM or floating rate option. I'm not sure why it would be
harder for me to get another mortgage through them, seeing as I've already built
up a bit of equity.
Hmmmm let me see. The hope is that the private sector will step in and take
up the slack. What did I see this week on CNBC? BOA will slash the mortage
originating jobs by 2100??? Doesn't seem to me that, that is a sign that BOA
(at least) has any intention of taking up any slack.... Get ready for the
second half of the Great Recession.
@James
Edwards the problem is, we have lived under a false economy for so
long, no one knows what the consequences of removing all the back door stimulus
and government backing will be! Very, very few American's understand how much of
the U.S. economy has been propped up by incentives or government backing such as
Fannie and Freddie. While I would agree, this isn't sustainable, I would also
concur, that removing all those supports, could cause the entire building to
collapse. I really do believe that this is much more complicated than the vast
majority of people make it out to be...
This is a good thing and helps create a stable market. If a buyer does not
have the ability to put 25% to 30% down, they should not be buying in the first
place. If this was the law prior to the last housing bubble, the bubble never
would have happened.
I disagree with you on the 25-30% down part of it. If an applicant has only
5% down, but has had a job for 10 years, makes $130K or more a year, and has
above average credit, why shouldn't they be eligible for a mortgage? Like alot
of credit vehicles you use everyday, like your credit card or auto loan, it
rests on your ability to pay and your household balance sheet. To re-state your
case, the banks needed to have much more rigorous means testing for loan
applicants than they did. Down payment percentage should really be a flexible
parameter that can be scaled on credit risk for each applicant.
Why a meaningful downpayment?? So you can't walk away from a home with no
damage done.
Problem with "flexible parameters" is that flexibility evolves into no down payment.
Problem with "flexible parameters" is that flexibility evolves into no down payment.
@Kent
Johnson - Buying a $400k house and putting 25% down would require
someone saving $1000/month for a little over 8 years...that is pretty ridiculous
and for most people that would be next to impossible.
Barney Frank and his Clintoon admin friends wanted home ownership for
everyone, they got it and caused the great depression part 2.
I just want to hear Barney Frank say "sufferin succatash", don't you?
I just want to hear Barney Frank say "sufferin succatash", don't you?
"We can put light where there's darkness, and hope where there's despondency
in this country. And part of it is working together as a nation to encourage
folks to own their own home."
- President George W. Bush, Oct. 15, 2002
- President George W. Bush, Oct. 15, 2002
@ Duane Feger Bush was/is definitely a backdoor Progressive. His tenure as
Texas governor saw a much more Democratic Socialist fiscal approach than a
Conservative one. He floated some fiscally conservative ideas (I.e., privatize
SSN) as President, but I think he did so knowing they would never be
implemented.
Strangely, I respect Obama more than George Bush in that at least you know where you stand with Obama. He's out to destroy and rebuild this "Imperialist" country, into God knows what, and everything he does is geared toward that. Bush was a very deceitful RINO IMHO.
Strangely, I respect Obama more than George Bush in that at least you know where you stand with Obama. He's out to destroy and rebuild this "Imperialist" country, into God knows what, and everything he does is geared toward that. Bush was a very deceitful RINO IMHO.
@Duane
Feger-- THIS WAS PRESIDENT CLINTON'S DOING...
Origin of the Housing Bubble: “The National Homeownership Strategy
More than 4 years into the collapse of the Housing Bubble much has been written and spoken on the subject. A Google search for “housing bubble” yields 1,110,000 results. Economists have debated why the event occurred. The media has covered its aftermath exhaustively. Politicians and bureaucrats have implemented the most aggressive public policy response since The Great Depression.
Genuine economic understanding has proven to be elusive.
A Google search for the term “national homeownership strategy” yields 9,040 results. Only a tiny percentage of these references are from recognizable media sources written in the past decade (estimated to be less than 5%). The overwhelming majority of listings are Government sources, library archives, catalogued books or dated materials.
A Historical Introduction
“In the Spring and Summer of 1994, Secretary Henry Cisneros met with leaders of major national organizations from the housing industry to solicit their views about establishing a national homeownership partnership.”
- HUD, "Partners in the American Dream", May 1995
“In 1994, at the President’s request, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) began work to develop a National Homeownership Strategy with the goal of lifting the overall homeownership rate to 67.5 percent by the end of the year 2000. While the most tangible goal of the National Homeownership Strategy was to raise the overall homeownership rate, in presenting the strategy HUD pointed explicitly to declines in homeownership rates among low-income, young, and minority households as motivation for these efforts.” - U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Policy Development and Research website
"At the request of President Clinton, HUD is working with dozens of national leaders in government and the housing industry to implement the National Homeownership Strategy, an unprecedented public-private partnership to increase homeownership to a record-high level over the next 6 years.” - Urban Policy Brief Number 2, August 1995
“Federal institutions, policies, and programs alone cannot meet President Clinton's goal of record-high levels of homeownership within the next 6 years. HUD has forged a nationwide partnership that will draw on the resources and creativity of lenders, builders, real estate professionals, community-based nonprofit organizations, consumer groups, State and local governments and housing finance agencies, and many others in a cooperative, multifaceted campaign to create ownership opportunities” - The National Homeownership Strategy
READ MORE:
http://theaffordablemortgagedepression.com/2010/03/11/origin-of-the-housing-bubble-the-national-homeownership-strategy.aspx
Origin of the Housing Bubble: “The National Homeownership Strategy
More than 4 years into the collapse of the Housing Bubble much has been written and spoken on the subject. A Google search for “housing bubble” yields 1,110,000 results. Economists have debated why the event occurred. The media has covered its aftermath exhaustively. Politicians and bureaucrats have implemented the most aggressive public policy response since The Great Depression.
Genuine economic understanding has proven to be elusive.
A Google search for the term “national homeownership strategy” yields 9,040 results. Only a tiny percentage of these references are from recognizable media sources written in the past decade (estimated to be less than 5%). The overwhelming majority of listings are Government sources, library archives, catalogued books or dated materials.
A Historical Introduction
“In the Spring and Summer of 1994, Secretary Henry Cisneros met with leaders of major national organizations from the housing industry to solicit their views about establishing a national homeownership partnership.”
- HUD, "Partners in the American Dream", May 1995
“In 1994, at the President’s request, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) began work to develop a National Homeownership Strategy with the goal of lifting the overall homeownership rate to 67.5 percent by the end of the year 2000. While the most tangible goal of the National Homeownership Strategy was to raise the overall homeownership rate, in presenting the strategy HUD pointed explicitly to declines in homeownership rates among low-income, young, and minority households as motivation for these efforts.” - U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Policy Development and Research website
"At the request of President Clinton, HUD is working with dozens of national leaders in government and the housing industry to implement the National Homeownership Strategy, an unprecedented public-private partnership to increase homeownership to a record-high level over the next 6 years.” - Urban Policy Brief Number 2, August 1995
“Federal institutions, policies, and programs alone cannot meet President Clinton's goal of record-high levels of homeownership within the next 6 years. HUD has forged a nationwide partnership that will draw on the resources and creativity of lenders, builders, real estate professionals, community-based nonprofit organizations, consumer groups, State and local governments and housing finance agencies, and many others in a cooperative, multifaceted campaign to create ownership opportunities” - The National Homeownership Strategy
READ MORE:
http://theaffordablemortgagedepression.com/2010/03/11/origin-of-the-housing-bubble-the-national-homeownership-strategy.aspx
A house is primarily to live in. Nowadays everything is "business". Gross
materialism just creates a very restless, messed up, subhuman
society.
Median household income: $50,000
Median household income * 3 = $150,000 = correct price for homes
Current median home price: $213,000
(150 - 213)/213 = -30%
House prices still need to fall 30%.
Median household income * 3 = $150,000 = correct price for homes
Current median home price: $213,000
(150 - 213)/213 = -30%
House prices still need to fall 30%.
@Eric
Johnson You obviously don't live near a big city, such as Boston.
Houses here are 5x to 6x the median income, if not more.
@David Hart @Eric Johnson And this is unsustainable. I make a good living,
but there is no way I'm going to pay more than 2 to 3X my income. Whereas the
mortgage lender is trying to get me to go in for 5x my income. What a load of
bull.
Good thing I had my three homes refinanced then and just about have them
payed off. My land is payed for. Bought the last home (forclosure) last year for
considerably less than appraised, at a rock bottom rate and my son and his wife
rent it for $50 over the mortgage. They can live comfortably in the house (3
bedroom 1400/sqft) for $800/month. It has appreciated $50k+ in one year.
THATS how I help my family make it through these times. If you can...
THATS how I help my family make it through these times. If you can...
@Mark
Excaliguy It doesn't matter if your home appreciates unless you plan
on selling and downgrading or selling and never buying again. If you plan on
upgrading you want property to lose value, that will make your next home that
much cheaper in dollar terms. It's definitely smart to refinance at such low
interest rate (assuming it's fixed) but buying now is a terrible idea. Home
prices are still artificially too high. Plus, what's interesting, and what
people don't realize is that the lower the interest rates the more expensive the
home. What till we see a huge jump in rates, that's when home prices will
finally be affordable.
It always matters if your home appreciates, whether one plans to sell or not.
What is the point of purchasing a home if it doesn't appreciate??? (really??)
And I completely disagree on now being a bad time to purchase. You can chase median prices or you can pay lower rates. Given the drop in median price since April 2008 (314,000) and 4% APR I'll take the lower rate ANY DAY. The mortgage rate can add up to 3X the median purchase price over the course of a loan.
And I completely disagree on now being a bad time to purchase. You can chase median prices or you can pay lower rates. Given the drop in median price since April 2008 (314,000) and 4% APR I'll take the lower rate ANY DAY. The mortgage rate can add up to 3X the median purchase price over the course of a loan.
LOL
Borrowing, mortgaging, is NOT BUYING.
Do not be conned. Banks will loosen their lending parameters with higher rates... the short-term reward yields MORE for THEM. The scales of risk and reward will recalibrate. Besides, any diligent, hard working person that obediently pays their payment on a monthly basis for years to come at higher rates will be GOOD for the bank's financial health and offset the first payment defaults.
Higher rates might cause some people to SAVE more, which they can turn around to use in a transaction where they actually BUY the asset instead of borrowing for it.
Borrowing, mortgaging, is NOT BUYING.
Do not be conned. Banks will loosen their lending parameters with higher rates... the short-term reward yields MORE for THEM. The scales of risk and reward will recalibrate. Besides, any diligent, hard working person that obediently pays their payment on a monthly basis for years to come at higher rates will be GOOD for the bank's financial health and offset the first payment defaults.
Higher rates might cause some people to SAVE more, which they can turn around to use in a transaction where they actually BUY the asset instead of borrowing for it.
it might get easier to get loans not harder because those rules make banks
start playing the game with certainty, so they would relax the rules and the
required FICO score to comply the said rules. although, rising interest rate
might make it more costly but not harder.
@JOEY BAHRAMI Rising interest rates depress the sticker price of homes. Just
as falling interest rates lead to a bubble in home prices.
No reason to step it up. If mortgages are more difficult to obtain next
year, the selling price of homes will DROP. Just imagine the selling price of
homes if there were no mortgages, and everyone had to pay 100% cash. There is a
pro and a con to every policy.
No it was $60,000 and I wouldnt spend $600,000 on a house even if I could
afford it.
David sir...majority of what u wrote, I will not argue or counter. But still
Obozo does not show leadership skills of any type. I am for more taxes being
paid, but Congress must change the rules. People take advantage of the rules
which are legal. There is a lot of profits overseas, because Congress and the
companies can not compromise in how to deal with the profits. Allow companies
to bring profits back into the USA, but a good % must be for infrastructure,
manufacturing etc. WE voted for these morons in office, and WE must take
responsibility for this and not blame the companies or whatever. I know there
are people who are not able to pay taxes for a number of reasons, and I can
respect that, but I have an issue with able bodied people who can work, but will
not. And I have a problem for Obozo and others trying to take my money away,
which I have worked hard for 30-40 years preparing for the future. No one gave
it to me, but there were opportunities I took advantage of. My statement was
general in nature...for those families who lost everything in the recession,
government should do more, but for those people who were trying to flip houses
or buying a house beyond their means, I have not pity or sorrow for them...they
deserve this.
@Clyde
Gillis Gross disrespect. Whether you like him or not (and there's a
lot not to like) you should be respectful of your President. Of course, if you
are a bozo then I can understand why you would refer to him as such. The
question is, are you as much of a bozo as you write?
oh, another one who voted for President Obozo. they are hard to find or at
least admit it. This country is free to speak, and I am speaking. I vote. Not
sure if u do, and if u do not, u should not be making comments, u have not
earned the right. I respect the office but do not respect Obozo. Why is it
now, if someone speaks ill of Obozo it is a big issue, when people spoke bad
things of Bush or other presidents...it was ok. So sir...WE obozo's need to
stick together. sorry I am picking on ur guy!...tell him to hurry up and take
Barbara Walters chair on the View..he fits perfect.
@Clyde Gillis Actually wise guy I was a Republican for decades until quite
recently when I switched to Independent which means, in case of your general
ignorance, that I can vote for anyone irrespective of party. In point of actual
fact I find Mr. Obama to be a dawdling do-nothing President who has not lived up
to his glorious and well crafted speeches. But, I have enough respect for the
office, which is occupied presently by Mr. Obama, not to be as crass and crude
as you are. It is your type of language, radicalism, and attitude which has
driven many away from the Republican Party, including myself. You should be
proud!!
He isn't "my guy," and never will be based on his record. On the other hand I also could not stomach flip flopper Romney who made some stupid remarks such as the "47%" which helped killed candidacy, nor did I like the fact that McCain picked Palin who knew nothing then, and probably knows even less now. She also went for the money rather than at least complete her elected position in Alaska which leaves very little respect for her and her political positions (if you call them that).
Yes it is free speech and yes you do have the right to say anything you please. However, to have a rational debate is one thing, but to act ignorant and stupid is yet another.
He isn't "my guy," and never will be based on his record. On the other hand I also could not stomach flip flopper Romney who made some stupid remarks such as the "47%" which helped killed candidacy, nor did I like the fact that McCain picked Palin who knew nothing then, and probably knows even less now. She also went for the money rather than at least complete her elected position in Alaska which leaves very little respect for her and her political positions (if you call them that).
Yes it is free speech and yes you do have the right to say anything you please. However, to have a rational debate is one thing, but to act ignorant and stupid is yet another.
@Clyde
Gillis No but I'd love to meet you and knock your teeth down your
throat.
Philip boy...this website is for adults...children should not
play...especially those who are very sensitive as u are? do u beat ur wife and
children when u are frustrated? rhis is definitely a problem. please go to a
doctor...I am worried about u sonny!!! oh, pick a doctor who has
lollipops...they taste good and give u a sugar rush!
Show More Comments
Loading
Installment loans for bad credit lenders offer the individual amount up to £10000 which will help the individual in fulfilling their both short term and long term needs in spite of their faulty credit scores.
ReplyDeletepayday loans over 6 months
120 day installment loans
500 Loans for Bad Credit
sunday payday loans no credit check could be a fabulous funding solution for bad credit holders as there is no credit check process involve.
ReplyDeleteSunday Night Payday Loans
Saturday Loans
Saturday Payday Lenders
Saturday Payday Loan
payday loan saturday
When it comes to perfect Designing Electric Chrome Towel Rail At Lower Prices for our homes, which are often very suspicious that it is difficult, time consuming and expensive decision, but there are a variety of forms, and aspects that can be considered to give a better chance if the achievement Ideal bathroom next to you wanted.
ReplyDeleteFor More Detail us at: http://www.ukbathroomhub.co.uk/heating.html
It is exciting to imagine Leggings Combo Packs asked the reinvention of popular ethnic wear. Suits emerged as one of the major trends that ethnic wear framework, increasing ease of use and offer great variability in the shade.
ReplyDeleteMore Details: http://www.nituwears.co.in/legging-combos.html