So if I buy a car or a boat and somehow get "duped" into a load I wasn't expecting, can I have the government bail me out too? I don't think so. Both parties in this housing "crisis" are guilty of one thing - greed. And we shouldn't be rewarding greed, ever! Housing markets go up and go down. If someone thought otherwise, tough. The value of my condo is going down, but I don't get a lower payment because I can afford it? That's total bunk.

So Jason I take it both you and McCain want to ignore all of those borrowers who've been duped into an adjustable rate mortgage (ARM)? Now if you knew exactly what an ARM was and you were fool enough to buy into it (some walk away convinced that they'll be making extra money by the time of the rate adjust), or you were speculating on property, or you wanted a summer home with a lower payment for a few years, then of course I say let them burn! But there is evidence I've heard of otherwise deserving individuals who could have easily qualified for a standard mortgage and were duped into an ARM. From what I hear credit agents make a better commi$$ion on ARMs, and they have been known to steer customers towards them for no apparent reason and even sign them up for ARMs on the false pretense of a standard loan. I've heard stories of people who thought they had a standard loan until one month they get a huge bill and come to find that the legalese fine print on page twenty of their loan spells out a little surprise for them. I believe all of this has been detailed on the show NOW on PBS, and if I remember right they even interviewed of all people a real estate lawyer who did figure out that he had an ARM until after his payment sky rocketed above what he could afford and his house depreciated below what he could refinance. You know things like hidden ARM clauses and 900% interest pay day loans put the loan sharks of old to shame, and if anyone deserves to burn for the mortgage crisis its today's legal loan sharks and the reganomics worshiping (de)regulaters who've taken a massive crap not just on anyone they can dupe but also on the American economy and the American people in general.

I think both Jason and Michael have valid points. I do not believe that it is the government's job to bailout people for irresponsible and risky behavior. There needs to be a much greater emphasis on financial literacy and education because a lot of people thought they were just going to flip homes or bit off more house than they could chew. But there is also evidence that financial institutions took advantage of people, or looked the other way to make a quick buck. And because of this type of behavior, everyone is going to feel the brunt of it.

Based on McCain's statements, he really doesn't differ much from Obama on some points. Both have said that 1) there should not be bailouts for irresponsible lenders and borrowers; 2) there needs to be regulation reforms to address the problems that caused this to happen, such as a lack of transparency and accountability; and 3) that aid should be given to the neediest individuals.

As with both of the Democratic proposals, I question where the government is going to get 30 billion dollars (China?) so I am not comfortable with the stimulus package.

So I guess, my only problem with McCain's speech is that he is taking a wait and see approach, but criticizing those that have actually offered a proposal. It reminds me of the old saying, if you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the problem. So if McCain disagrees with the Democrats so much about their stimulus package, he should step up to the plate with what he considers a better idea, instead of sitting on the sidelines and complaining.

I blame the banks