The Obama/Geithner team stepped back on this one. But ethical leadership questions remain at the forefront.

According to Bloomberg, Treasury said: >>>would be a bad deal for taxpayers and won’t be allowed<<<.

The real question now is why isn't the CEO and Board of Directors of Fannie Mae replaced? WE own it. They tried to defraud us.

The Bloomberg story rambled on with its Wall Street benevolence. I will note:

1. The true story is not about Goldman Sachs. It is about a trial balloon Obama/Geithner, Wall Street and a myriad of misguided talking heads floated to make excuses for another Wall Street raid on Main Street.

2. Of course selling "tax credits" from a Govt subsidiary would cost the taxpayers. More importantly, it was a cost with no value. It was blatantly obvious. It's the only way Goldman Sachs can make a profit from the transaction. Why did Obama/Geithner permit the trial balloon? When will the buffoons who tried to pull this over on the public be replaced?

3. This is about "PAY TO PLAY" tax discounts!!!!! At its heart, "pay to play" is anti-democratic. Fannie Mae shouldn't be allowed to use a tax credit until it has earned the right. Being now owned by the US Govt, those tax credits are essentially retired - the right doesn't exist anymore. There is no need to sell them as a discount mechanism for other companies to reduce their taxes.

4. This is all about the absurd gaming of our "system" that our elite schools, and students, feel is now socially acceptable. In the pursuit of profit, there are too many that feel taking from others, without providing value, is an embraced social norm. You are all in a position to change this.

5. Bloomberg, by using the quote:

<<“If we are not able to execute sales or other transactions in order to realize the benefits of these investments or do not receive regulatory approval for such transactions, we may record significant other-than-temporary impairment,” Freddie Mac said. >>

without a balancing opposing view provides Wall Street hypnotic speech and unbalanced journalism. Worse, it was in the closing, which reinforces this view. The "benefits of these investments" put Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae into bankruptcy that just this week shows is still costing US taxpayers incredible sums of money (let's reflect on how the additional $15B that Fannie seeks could be used elsewhere to enhance society). Fannie and Freddie are free to maximize these benefits by getting out of bankruptcy - by practicing their craft and providing value to society - not by lowering someone else's taxes at the taxpayer expense.

6. Journalists should be quoting college professors and Government personnel who understand this. You may need to visit those concerned about our capitalistic, democratic society instead of hard core financial types. After all, finance is but a support mechanism for the beneficial benefits of business. Last century's JP Morgan understood this. It's obvious that the leaders at Fannie Mae and Goldman Sachs, don't.

This proposal was an absurd proposal. It would have institutionalized "pay to play" to permit an elite few to lower taxes at the expense of our society. It never would have achieved "trial balloon" status in past eras.

It shows that Fannie Mae and Goldman Sachs execs just don't "get it".

Journalists need to start presenting balanced articles at the get go. Otherwise journalists don't "get it" and continue to shill for wayward elements of our financial industry. Write them.

Financial issues are front and center in the most important public policy decisions of Obama's admin. He had severely favored Wall Street. This has to end or Middle Class Main Street disappears.