Last week I wrote "... all agree the collapse of FANFRED was definitely the hole in the economic dike that gave way - - to this point no one has the cajones to even hint that it was a bad idea at its inception, which it was, or God forbid, it should be dissolved. 
But today I saw this... breakup, sale of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac. Courtesy Senator John Kyl (R) AZ.

Will wonders never cease.

Also, it appears Investors Business Daily have been reading my material as when I kddingly suggested William Ayers is on Obamas short list for Sec. of Education.  RTWT editorial  they treat it with the seriousness it warrants.

Snippet:

John McCain needs to repeatedly point out the stealth socialism of Ayers' education agenda and Obama's complicity in it. Otherwise, we may one day see Ayers as Obama's secretary of education.

The best comment on Ayers, noted in the editorial is from Sol Stern via Village Voice...
"Calling Ayers a school reformer is like calling Stalin an agricultural reformer".

Now that Ayres is finally getting some media attention I hope more commentators from our side heed the advice of Thomas Sowell who notes that guilt by association is easily dismissed so it is important to make the distinction between that and guilt by alliance.  Good point.  

a taste

Associations are very different from alliances. Allies are not just people who happen to be where you are or who happen to be doing the same things you do. You choose allies deliberately for a reason. The kind of allies you choose says something about you. TRTWT The Real Obama

Speaking of previous rants, some time ago I attempted an explanation on the motivations of todays Democrats and, being as charitable as my own common sense could allow, concluded it is a matter of political fundamentalism.  

"I think I have finally figured it out.  It takes more than mental contortion to hold two diametrically opposing thoughts simultaneously - - it takes the mentality of a fundamentalist. Too harsh you say?
   
Here is the Encarta definition:

1. movement with strict view of doctrine: a religious or political movement based on a literal interpretation of and strict adherence to doctrine, especially as a return to former principles
   
.... the "literal interpretation and fundamental doctrine" of a political party is to win elections.  Knowing that it is easier to grasp the ends-justifies-the-means mentality so prevalent on the left.  
   
By example I also said
..."Dems are perfectly willing to both inflict and endure casualties for their cause. This explains how Reid, Pelosi, Feingold, et. al. have no compunction about aiding and abetting the enemy with their reckless, troop-endangering rhetoric...."

In his recent sideline non-performance in the financial crisis Obama demonstrated once again his willingness endure carnage so long as it enhances his chances of winning.  It is all about, nothing but, winning the next election.  Once you get this, you get the left.  Too bad, and downright frightening, that so damn many of them populate the Democrat party these days, right up to the top.

One last thing, and it might be a future example of the same mentality. Since I heard it for the second time in last nights debate I need to comment on one of the Ohole's glaring bits of demagogic asininity, this one concerning healthcare.

I was a licensed health insurance agent for a time in the not too distant past so I do have some credibility on the subject.  Obama on the other hand doesn't, and his plan to mandate insurance companies coverage of pre-existing conditions proves he hasn't a clue about how insurance works.

Take this prediction to the bank my friends: Mandating coverage of pre-existing conditions will do for the health insurance companies what subprime loans did for the mortgage business.  It is an exact parallel, social engineering completely at odds with the realities of the marketplace.    

How stupid is it?  That's best answered with another question: why would a healthy person pay for health insurance month after month when they can wait until AFTER they're sick to get it?  Insurers can only survive with a pool of healthy monthly premium payers and this idea, over time, is guaranteed to drain the pool.  It might make a good sound bite in a campaign speech but the likely result will be the complete demise of the health insurance industry, which, knowing them, is probably all part of the plan.