<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Obama Fannie Mae Chicago Home Mortgage $903,000 over Legal Limit</title>
	<link>http://www.bloggernews.net/119006</link>
	<description>High-quality English language analysis and editorial writing on the news.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 15:30:56 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: michael mortgage banker</title>
		<link>http://www.bloggernews.net/119006#comment-1098930</link>
		<dc:creator>michael mortgage banker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 2009 17:45:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bloggernews.net/119006#comment-1098930</guid>
		<description>Let me start out by saying - I am NOT a fan of President Obama...

Let's clarify a few things:

The buyer you refer to (Miceli) bought the property as Trustee on behalf of The Northern Trust Co # 10209 for $1,650,000 and used $250,000 borrowed by the trust in the form of an equity line.

The SELLER is listed as having had a 1,320,000 Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac loan.

Typically, that entry is a default entry from a pull down menu.  There is no such thing as a "Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac" loan.  The document is trying to communicate that there is conventional financing on the property.  Most likely, there was a conventional first mortgage up to $417,000 and a second mortgage... possibly even a home equity line on top of that, all adding up to the 1,320,000 total payoff.

Again, I am NOT a fan of President Obama, but I am a fan of accuracy!  There are PLENTY of things we can be talking about that are real issues.

By incorrectly drawing attention to a non-issue, you are reducing the efficacy of bringing up real issues like the socialization of private industry or gun control!

If you are a conservative as I am, let's stick to the real issues and raise valid concerns instead of throwing up smoke screens that do nothing to educate voters.

God bless you, and God bless America.

Michael</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let me start out by saying - I am NOT a fan of President Obama&#8230;</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s clarify a few things:</p>
<p>The buyer you refer to (Miceli) bought the property as Trustee on behalf of The Northern Trust Co # 10209 for $1,650,000 and used $250,000 borrowed by the trust in the form of an equity line.</p>
<p>The SELLER is listed as having had a 1,320,000 Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac loan.</p>
<p>Typically, that entry is a default entry from a pull down menu.  There is no such thing as a &#8220;Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac&#8221; loan.  The document is trying to communicate that there is conventional financing on the property.  Most likely, there was a conventional first mortgage up to $417,000 and a second mortgage&#8230; possibly even a home equity line on top of that, all adding up to the 1,320,000 total payoff.</p>
<p>Again, I am NOT a fan of President Obama, but I am a fan of accuracy!  There are PLENTY of things we can be talking about that are real issues.</p>
<p>By incorrectly drawing attention to a non-issue, you are reducing the efficacy of bringing up real issues like the socialization of private industry or gun control!</p>
<p>If you are a conservative as I am, let&#8217;s stick to the real issues and raise valid concerns instead of throwing up smoke screens that do nothing to educate voters.</p>
<p>God bless you, and God bless America.</p>
<p>Michael</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Flash</title>
		<link>http://www.bloggernews.net/119006#comment-825079</link>
		<dc:creator>Flash</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 14:35:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bloggernews.net/119006#comment-825079</guid>
		<description>How totally warm and fuzzy...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How totally warm and fuzzy&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

