Wall Street tries the hair of the dog

posted at 12:15 pm on August 25, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

Great news!  The wizards of Wall Street have discovered a new way to repackage the toxic assets clogging the nation’s ledgers and provide an antidote to the poison that has handicapped the American economy.  They want to create new mortgage-backed securities that will absorb the old MBSs, which are languishing at junk-bond status, with stable-valuation assets, in a new bond series that will garner a AAA rating.

Hey, what could go wrong with trying exactly what Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac did that put us in the position we’re in now something new?

Wall Street may have discovered a way out from under the bad debt and risky mortgages that have clogged the financial markets. The would-be solution probably sounds familiar: It’s a lot like what got banks in trouble in the first place.

In recent months investment banks have been repackaging old mortgage securities and offering to sell them as new products, a plan that’s nearly identical to the complicated investment packages at the heart of the market’s collapse. …

In recent months, banks have tiptoed toward a possible solution, one in which the really good bonds get bundled with some not-quite-so-good bonds. Banks sweeten the deal for investors and, voila, the newly repackaged bonds receive AAA ratings, a stamp of approval that means they’re the safest investment you can buy.

“You’ve now taken what was an A-rated security and made it eligible for AAA treatment,” said Richard Reilly, a partner with White & Case in New York.

Wonderful!  It’s kind of like assuming that Fannie/Freddie MBSs were solid investments, because they had the backing of the federal government.  Look how well that turned out for America and the investor class!

Advocates say that this differs from the previous round of stupidity because investors will know exactly the risk they’re taking.  If that’s the case, though, then the sellers of these bonds wouldn’t be trying so hard to get that gold-plated AAA rating for the securities.  In fact, that rating obscures the risk by making bonds carrying toxic assets look like a sure bet, a reliable instrument for growth, when in fact it carries a significant risk.

I’m no populist.  I believe in a free market with sensible regulation.  This, however, demonstrates that occasionally capitalists are capitalism’s worst enemies.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

greed is good.

moonbatkiller on August 25, 2009 at 12:19 PM

The AAA rating is worthless in this market. Fannie and Freddie’s debt never fell below AAA. I don’t see how any ratings agency could give any MBS a AAA rating in this environment, when house prices are still unstable and unemployment is rising. How can you possibly model default rates on mortgages in this market?

rockmom on August 25, 2009 at 12:19 PM

Buyer beware, just as long as my portfolio managers are being properly wary.

Bishop on August 25, 2009 at 12:19 PM

Maybe the new bonds come with a free bowl of soup.

Chuck Schick on August 25, 2009 at 12:20 PM

Its hard to sell a turd as a diamond. lol

Worth checking: Best use of Silent No More in a short Video

deedtrader on August 25, 2009 at 12:20 PM

Look I put spicy mustard on my crap sandwich, want a bite?

NickelAndDime on August 25, 2009 at 12:20 PM

This isn’t really capitalism any more than selling snake oil is. Snake oil with a AAA rating.

jhffmn on August 25, 2009 at 12:21 PM

REALLY What could go wrong?

puddinhead on August 25, 2009 at 12:21 PM

did they say “NEW”?? Well, there you have it—it’s gotta be good then…

look, a puppy!

ted c on August 25, 2009 at 12:21 PM

Maybe the new bonds come with a free bowl of soup.

Chuck Schick on August 25, 2009 at 12:20 PM

But no spoon or crackers.

portlandon on August 25, 2009 at 12:21 PM

Do these bonds have government backing? Not explicitly clear in the article. If the bonds have ZERO government backing…buyer beware. If there is government back, can it!

WashJeff on August 25, 2009 at 12:22 PM

“Nothing up my sleeve…”

Akzed on August 25, 2009 at 12:23 PM

I am thinking about taking my money out of the market and burying it in a coffee can.

TXMomof3 on August 25, 2009 at 12:23 PM

The textbook definition of insanity.

lawtwin on August 25, 2009 at 12:24 PM

But no spoon or crackers.

portlandon on August 25, 2009 at 12:21 PM

soup is free but you have to pay for the spoon and crackers

Doctor Zhivago on August 25, 2009 at 12:24 PM

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/02/the_clowardpiven_strategy_of_e.html

Can’t stress this enough!

lyfsatrip on August 25, 2009 at 12:25 PM

This, however, demonstrates that occasionally capitalists are capitalism’s worst enemies.

Go back to Russia, Fidel.

YYZ on August 25, 2009 at 12:26 PM

More wealth has been lost chasing yield than in trading equities. When a broker offers a better return than the risk-free rate, it’s because there is risk. If the risk isn’t transparent or if the investor doesn’t understand it don’t bet the nest egg.

dedalus on August 25, 2009 at 12:26 PM

Reminiscent of “our spending and taxing has not worked out well so far, we need to do more!” This will likely not end well.

Christian Conservative on August 25, 2009 at 12:28 PM

Not everything that someone offers for sale is a good thing. And you cannot cut out risk unless you cut out the reward as well.

rbj on August 25, 2009 at 12:29 PM

Advocates say that this differs from the previous round of stupidity because investors will know exactly the risk they’re taking.

Buy the improved MSB’s- Now with 30% more stupid!

highhopes on August 25, 2009 at 12:31 PM

“It’s kind of like assuming that Fannie/Freddie MBSs were solid investments, because they had the backing of the federal government.”

If you look behind the curtain……..

…….. I have a feeling Barney Frank and Chris Dodd have their hands all over this, again.

Seven Percent Solution on August 25, 2009 at 12:31 PM

The textbook definition of insanity.

lawtwin on August 25, 2009 at 12:24 PM

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
— Albert Einstein, (attributed)

CyberCipher on August 25, 2009 at 12:32 PM

Worth checking: Best use of Silent No More in a short Video

deedtrader on August 25, 2009 at 12:20 PM

Dude, seriously. It’s a fine video, but stop pimping it in every single thread.

BadgerHawk on August 25, 2009 at 12:33 PM

This, however, demonstrates that occasionally capitalists are capitalism’s worst enemies.

At this point, I would the percentage of real capitalists on Wall Street at about 55% or 60%. Maybe.

BigD on August 25, 2009 at 12:35 PM

I am thinking about taking my money out of the market and burying it in a coffee can.

TXMomof3 on August 25, 2009 at 12:23 PM

The First National Bank of Mattress. Sounds good.

newton on August 25, 2009 at 12:38 PM

Dude, seriously. It’s a fine video, but stop pimping it in every single thread.

BadgerHawk on August 25, 2009 at 12:33 PM

Amen!

Thanks for saying what I’ve been thinking for the past couple of days.

Knucklehead on August 25, 2009 at 12:38 PM

“I believe in a free market with sensible regulation. ”

That is a contradiction in terms Ed.

Eisenhorn on August 25, 2009 at 12:39 PM

They better check with Barney Frank, and Chris Dodd on this.

d1carter on August 25, 2009 at 12:41 PM

What most people forget when they bitch about regulations on business/finance/etc is that capitalism, going back to Adam Smith’s Invisible Hand, requires perfect transparency. Lack of transparency, and anything else that distorts the market pricing, prevents laissez faire, free-market systems from working properly.

Regulations and laws are necessary to make capitalism work because there is an incentive to game the system (monopolies, price-fixing, etc), which is good for the ones doing it and bad for everyone else.

Regulations become bad when government uses them to push an agenda rather than facilitate the market, such as forcing banks to take more risky loans so people that otherwise could not afford a house can buy one.

zerosheep on August 25, 2009 at 12:45 PM

“I believe in a free market with sensible regulation. ”

That is a contradiction in terms Ed.

Eisenhorn on August 25, 2009 at 12:39 PM

The ability to engage in fraudulent behaviour doesn’t make a market free.

jhffmn on August 25, 2009 at 12:45 PM

Wow I’m confused, I read “hair of the dog” and thought this was about Rachael Maddow! How embarassing…

Keef Overbite on August 25, 2009 at 12:46 PM

And we still have $645,000,000,000,000 of credit derivatives out there floating around that still need to be absorbed.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

This is just another ponzi scheme or bubble or whatever the new term is.

The international bankers are working night and day to suck every penny out of the US before they turn us into slaves.

ms on August 25, 2009 at 12:48 PM

Dude, seriously. It’s a fine video, but stop pimping it in every single thread.

BadgerHawk on August 25, 2009 at 12:33 PM

Actually I am glad he posted it, I hadn’t seen or heard of it before……
*
I consider this right up with the “list” of items that Obama hasn’t “revealed”….I haven’t seen that list either….

right2bright on August 25, 2009 at 12:48 PM

Cash for Junk Bonds

faraway on August 25, 2009 at 12:48 PM

“I believe in a free market with sensible regulation. ”

That is a contradiction in terms Ed.

Eisenhorn on August 25, 2009 at 12:39 PM

In an orderly society, most everything has “regulation”.
Free speech, has “regulation”…notice the word “sensible”.

right2bright on August 25, 2009 at 12:50 PM

This, however, demonstrates that occasionally capitalists crooks are capitalism’s worst enemies.

MB4 on August 25, 2009 at 12:51 PM

This isn’t Wall Street’s idea. It’s Turbo Tax Timmy’s. He’s been pushing it since the mortgage meltdown. Stupid is as stupid does…

ROCnPhilly on August 25, 2009 at 12:51 PM

Oh goody, repackaged grab bags.

obladioblada on August 25, 2009 at 12:52 PM

Allah…Ed…someone has to start a thread on this. L-O-freakin’-L!!!!!!

http://www.timhawkins.net/video/government-can.html

teffertoes on August 25, 2009 at 12:56 PM

Hope they include splatter proof plastic bags with the MBS’s with a place to leap from.

Einstein’s definition of “insanity” strikes again.

larvcom on August 25, 2009 at 1:01 PM

Is my interpretation of this misguided? If I’m a lender who’s been been forced to issue all of this credit to unreliable/unworthy credit seekers–which I otherwise would not issue–at the risk of the federal gubmint coming down on me in the form of fees, fines, audits, etc., then the first thing I’m going to do is find the fastest way to unload the garbage. The gubmint forced me to take this on. It’s not forcing me to keep it.

Not condoning these actions, necessarily, but government interference never ends well.

anglee99 on August 25, 2009 at 1:02 PM

There is nothing wrong with packaging debt instruments. The problem that had occured was not due to the packaging, but due to the misvaluation of debt (started with the CRA loans, much enhanced by Fannie and Freddie’s push to constantly clean the misvalued debt from the books of lenders, leaving them in a position of having to create more misvalued debt, and then being arbbed through the whole debt market) and the ratings agencies lying in order to keep the whole market afloat. With proper ratings and valuations, debt repackaging is a fine and important part of modern finance. The only question is whether we can get proper ratings, not the packaging itself.

progressoverpeace on August 25, 2009 at 1:02 PM

Ed, you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about here, with all due respect. Whether this is a good or bad investment is up for debate, whether or not you’ve analyzed it properly is not. YOu need to stick to things you understand because innovative financial investments you are totally clueless about.

Moody’s ranks everything. That isn’t the issue. The issue is whether or not they are creating a misleading AAA rating by bundling together bad loans with good loans. The problem here is that this is exactly what they did during 2005-2008. The difference is they have created a twist that is so innovative that no one knows if this twist will fix what problems they caused before.

You have done your readers a total disservice. You would have been better off not even writing about this because you clearly don’t know enough to make a proper analysis.

mike volpe on August 25, 2009 at 1:05 PM

I’m no populist. I believe in a free market with sensible regulation. This, however, demonstrates that occasionally capitalists are capitalism’s worst enemies.

Not so fast, Ed. Remember the only reason why the market is doing this is because it saw two very non-capitalist entities (FM/FM) fail in a free market, and a very non-capitalist solution to that problem (bailout city). So what we have are the external trappings of “free market” actions operating in a very non free market environment, while following very non free market examples that survived with the aid of a very non free market “solution”. There is nothing pro-market going on here, even if the “market” is doing it.

Weight of Glory on August 25, 2009 at 1:05 PM

Psssss! Hey Buddy. Want to buy some MBS’s? Its the good stuff, I promise. All the best real estate in Detroit.

GunRunner on August 25, 2009 at 1:06 PM

Here’s some more good news: Get ready for the next wave of supposedly safe assets to collapse.

Student loans have been packaged by the money-center banks much the way that mortgages were, and a lot of the related asset-backed securities are on the books of those banks.

Given how hard it is right now for a graduating student to get a job that makes him/her capable of servicing his/her student loan debt, do you think that student loans are going to be as safe as people thought in 2002-2007?

Doodad Pro on August 25, 2009 at 1:07 PM

They have to be doing this on purpose. Remember wall street is overwhelmingly democrat now. This is not the wall street of the eighties and early nineties.

jukin on August 25, 2009 at 1:08 PM

And which department of the Obama administration threw this lovely idea to wall street, and ordered them to push it out there?

Or are they THAT stupid???

capejasmine on August 25, 2009 at 1:09 PM

All i need to do is watch one episode of Bridezilla to know the US is doomed. People have no sense of frugality anymore. It’s spend spend spend, waste waste waste.

tflst5 on August 25, 2009 at 1:14 PM

banks aren’t capitalists.

If they were they’d all be out of business.

bankers are just another political class now who get the politicians to do their bidding. The most powerful political class at that.

bingsha on August 25, 2009 at 1:17 PM

bingsha on August 25, 2009 at 1:17 PM

This guy is right on. You aren’t capitalist if you create something out of nothing. That just makes you a liar.

The Calibur on August 25, 2009 at 1:26 PM

I take issue with the last sentence.
-
The capitalists are being asked by the government to absorb a cost that was created by the government. They’re coming up with the best solution they have within the framework given to them – which includes the inability to go out of business (especially in the case of Goldman Sachs).

rock the casbah on August 25, 2009 at 1:29 PM

Soooo…

Did ANYTHING change after the collapse?

Lets see… Mark to Market is gone.

We pumped hundreds of billions into banks, so they could make a profit.

Banks are still overleveraged.

Fannie and Freddie still exist, and are even more backed by the Government.

Government is still trying to get banks to give bogus loans.

And now, the Derivatives which were the straw that broke the camels back, are back…

Oh, and Bernacke is not going to lose his job, even though it was on HIS watch that all this happened…

Romeo13 on August 25, 2009 at 1:32 PM

“I believe in a free market with sensible regulation. ”

That is a contradiction in terms Ed.

Eisenhorn on August 25, 2009 at 12:39 PM

The ability to engage in fraudulent behaviour doesn’t make a market free.

jhffmn on August 25, 2009 at 12:45 PM

In fact, a ‘free market’, in the economical theory sense, is more or less defined by the absence of fraud.

Count to 10 on August 25, 2009 at 1:36 PM

Well, they still have one foot left, don’t they?

notagool on August 25, 2009 at 1:39 PM

Soooo…

Did ANYTHING change after the collapse?

Lets see… Mark to Market is gone.

We pumped hundreds of billions into banks, so they could make a profit.

Banks are still overleveraged.

Fannie and Freddie still exist, and are even more backed by the Government.

Government is still trying to get banks to give bogus loans.

And now, the Derivatives which were the straw that broke the camels back, are back…

Oh, and Bernacke is not going to lose his job, even though it was on HIS watch that all this happened…

Romeo13 on August 25, 2009 at 1:32 PM

Exactly, they are trying to reflate a debt-based economy.

Vashta.Nerada on August 25, 2009 at 1:40 PM

Oh, and Bernacke is not going to lose his job, even though it was on HIS watch that all this happened…

Romeo13 on August 25, 2009 at 1:32 PM

Why would he? He did everything the Democrats wanted.

Count to 10 on August 25, 2009 at 1:41 PM

“The Bankers own the Earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create deposits, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear, and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But if you wish to remain the slaves of Bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create deposits.”

The Calibur on August 25, 2009 at 1:42 PM

This, however, demonstrates that occasionally capitalists are capitalism’s worst enemies.

Foolish and irresponsible investors pose no systemic threat to capitalism. The threat arises when such behavior is encouraged by implicit government guarantees and a “too big to fail” mentality. Capitalism merely requires that individuals bear the full risk as well as the potential rewards of actions.

Ponz on August 25, 2009 at 1:58 PM

Ponz on August 25, 2009 at 1:58 PM

Very well said.

progressoverpeace on August 25, 2009 at 1:59 PM

Uh HELLO! Excuse me but I was under the impression that the stimulus money would go directly to purchase this debt.

sonnyspats1 on August 25, 2009 at 2:22 PM

What is Barney Frank’s position on this idea? He is a very reliable barometer—if he told me he would give me a reach around, I’d prepare for an anti-climatic evening.

GnuBreed on August 25, 2009 at 2:32 PM

This isn’t really capitalism any more than selling snake oil is. Snake oil with a AAA rating.

jhffmn on August 25, 2009 at 12:21 PM

Well said.

Monica on August 25, 2009 at 2:56 PM

They are still worthless!

It’s a lot like what got banks in trouble in the first place.

No, it is exactly the same thing. What is the definition of insanity…doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result.

The underlying debt instrument (those bad loans) that goes into those new and improved securities still have the fundamental problem, the toxic assets that are still toxic. A polished piece of turd is still a turd. And yes, they know the risk. But I am sure they would get bailed out again if they go under. Are they making this up as they go along, or what?

Patriot Vet on August 25, 2009 at 3:05 PM

“The point is, ladies and gentleman, that greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right, greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms; greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge has marked the upward surge of mankind. And greed, you mark my words, will not only save Teldar Paper, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA. Thank you very much.” Gordon Gekko
**************

Gekko, however, would not have supported government bailouts. Greed only works if private markets are allowed to cannibalize their failures. If the banks that faced financial ruin because of packaging debt were allowed to die, they would not be in a position to do it again.

mperek on August 25, 2009 at 3:07 PM

In fact, that rating obscures the risk by making bonds carrying toxic assets look like a sure bet, a reliable instrument for growth, when in fact it carries a significant risk.

Nobody with a brain is going to fall for the AAA MBS again. I think this is the best idea to package these toxic MBSs and get them sold. Remember, if the yield is high enough, these might turn out to be pretty good investments.

Bill C on August 25, 2009 at 3:10 PM

Did ANYTHING change after the collapse?

Lets see… Mark to Market is gone.

How is it gone? MTM is alive and kicking.

TopLawyer on August 25, 2009 at 3:12 PM

The AAA rating is worthless in this market. Fannie and Freddie’s debt never fell below AAA. I don’t see how any ratings agency could give any MBS a AAA rating in this environment, when house prices are still unstable and unemployment is rising. How can you possibly model default rates on mortgages in this market?

rockmom on August 25, 2009 at 12:19 PM

Exactly. How can you declare the bond rating of a potential product before it hits the market? It’s like those “Best Movie of the Year” promos.

Ed, you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about here, with all due respect. Whether this is a good or bad investment is up for debate, whether or not you’ve analyzed it properly is not. YOu need to stick to things you understand because innovative financial investments you are totally clueless about.

Moody’s ranks everything. That isn’t the issue. The issue is whether or not they are creating a misleading AAA rating by bundling together bad loans with good loans. The problem here is that this is exactly what they did during 2005-2008. The difference is they have created a twist that is so innovative that no one knows if this twist will fix what problems they caused before.

You have done your readers a total disservice. You would have been better off not even writing about this because you clearly don’t know enough to make a proper analysis.

mike volpe on August 25, 2009 at 1:05 PM

Please explain how anything not worth a AAA rating on its own, is somehow worth the ultimate highest rating when its bundled with better securities. Sewage plus spring water equals dirty water, not Champagne.

Please explain how something nobody on the planet would take as a gift, let alone buy, has any value at all.

Please explain how anything backed by a private entity, in a depression, has the strength of Treasury notes. I don’t care if the bank guarantees to buy it back from you for triple what you paid for it in sixty days, that’s only as sound as the issuing bank, and that’s none too sound.

Please explain how many years of higher education you have to take to forget these facts.

Chris_Balsz on August 25, 2009 at 3:15 PM

Well if you paid me 700 billion for doing something, I would do it again too.

LevStrauss on August 25, 2009 at 3:21 PM

Lipstick on a pig.

Robert17 on August 25, 2009 at 3:40 PM

Please explain how anything not worth a AAA rating on its own, is somehow worth the ultimate highest rating when its bundled with better securities. Sewage plus spring water equals dirty water, not Champagne.

Chris_Balsz on August 25, 2009 at 3:15 PM

I am not defending this new bundling, as I am confident that they will not be honest with the ratings, but here’s an analogy for how one can bundle junk to get higher valued instruments. Think of scramble golf. You can take 4 25 handicap golfers and still get a 5 over par scramble game out of the team, since you are only taking the top shots at each position. In the original bundlings, the AAA parts that came out of the bundles didn’t involve the entire package, but because that tranch was paid first by whichever parts of the bundle were performing, so they were buying claims to the best X% of the package, with that X% possibly comprising different parts of the bundle, depending on which loans were being serviced and which weren’t. The problem came not because of this bundling, but because of the lies about the actual values of the pieces that went into it. If one has honest ratings about the components of the bundles, then there is nothing wrong with taking, say, the top 5% of a bundle and having it perform as well as a true AAA instrument (just as in the scramble golf game).

Like I said, I don’t trust that there will be fair ratings on the components of these bundles, but you shouldn’t throw out the bundling concept just because of fraud over the parts, which is a different issue. I agree that doing the bundling specifically to hide the misvaluations of some of the components is fraud, but it isn’t the bundling that causes that.

progressoverpeace on August 25, 2009 at 3:51 PM

Suspect the Chinese won’t be buying this time. Anybody else want some of these 24K gold plated look alike wanna be securities? Only a few billion trillion available. Hurry! Get ‘em while they last!

Hummm. Where’d everybody go.

Flying Betsy Ross

Caststeel on August 25, 2009 at 4:13 PM

Oh, I know!

George Soros will buy all you have. NOT!

Flying Betsy Ross

Caststeel on August 25, 2009 at 4:16 PM

This is the first step in returning the market. If they are not using derivative contracts as the security and instead using the assets, this is a pretty standard MBS deal. The problem that crashed everything was two-fold: First, the cmo’s were backed up by Derivatives, iei, some third party companies credit rating, not the mortgages in the pool. Problem is, you couldn’t tell from one minute to the next if the company issuing the guarantee was indeed solvent -called “counter-party risk”. Second, FASB had enacted Mark to Market, which was disastrous in a rising interest rate environment. MTM required the financial institutions to evaluate their portfolios on a monthly basis based on current FED interest rates. So in this case, the Fed had raised interest rates 14 times (2.5%). Most banks were leveraged at around 90% (10% actual capital)and an increase in the FED rate caused a 25% to 40% devaluation in the mark to market value of their loan portfolio’s. All banks were insolvent that quickly. Coupled with the default by various lending institutions on their guarantees, it was a perfect storm. Funny, the FASB folks are still out there…they collapse the world economy and NOTHING happens to them….Under the proposed scenario, the MBS sellers are splitting the portfolio into various parts (or tranches) with the risky part having a higher return to the investors willing to take the risk…the way it should be done….If this works, it will go a long way toward stabilizing and energizing the markets….

colonelkurtz on August 25, 2009 at 4:16 PM

Problem is, there has been so much misinformation spread by the MSM. I always thought that if the Repub’s could have explained what happened and why….Well McCain didn’t have the brains to figure it out, much less understand it and the current Fascist doesn’t care…he’d rather use it to boost the destruction of the US economy….

colonelkurtz on August 25, 2009 at 4:23 PM

I guess everyone has forgotten the bubble created by Slick Wiliie in the dot.com bust huh. O not nearly as smart or slick as the doctor of love William Jefferson Clinton. However I do believe Obambi is a bigger liar than Slick.

bluegrass on August 25, 2009 at 6:00 PM

Step right up, yes sir, that’s right sir, you look like a savvy investor. I’ll bet you know all the ins and outs of the trade. You know a good deal when you hear one. I thought so. And that lady on your arm, you couldn’t afford that if you weren’t sharp, I can see that now. And have I got a deal for you. Yep, that’s right you sir. I know with your talents you’ll see clearly what a wonderful opportunity I’ve got here. Recently packaged, that’s right, brand new, no one’s even seen the contents yet. But right now, and I mean act right now, before everybody gets wind of this fabulous deal, I can help you be the pacesetter. Yes siree, Bob, all your friends are going to want in on this too-good-to-be-true, once in a lifetime offer. Bring your wallet? Get it out, don’t hesitate. No, don’t let the little lady see what’s inside, it may frighten the sweet little thing. Just kiddin’ there fella.

Real estate in a packaged deal. You’ve heard of real estate, right, yeah, you look like you’ve got that kind of smarts all right. Right here, before your very eyes, vast amounts of real estate holdings, just waiting for a new owner. And the price is reasonable my friend, that’s right, pennies on the dollar, government savvy money makin’ real estate we’re talkin’ here, and all you got to do is take the plunge. Fine print, not today folks, this is the real deal, once in a lifetime, go home feelin’ good about life, real estate. But wait, there’s more. You guessed, inside each package deal is the long term yield mansion maker, the same one you’ve seen on TV. Act now, keep that wallet out, and I’ll show you how to order.

Robert17 on August 25, 2009 at 6:20 PM

Gotta suck the slop out of the trough while it’s still being slopped…never know when it’s a “Capitalist pig’s” last meal.

Still trying to figure out who Napoleon’s Snowball is…?

Dr. ZhivBlago on August 25, 2009 at 8:44 PM