Joel Walsh is a dirtbag politician... Enough said.

This guy is out of control. He sure doesn't like people who disagree with him. I thought our congressional representatives were supposed to listen to their constituents, not scream at them. Time to elect someone else.

The more I read about Joe Walsh the more convinced I am that he doesn't belong in politics or any occupation that requires human interface. As Mr. Walsh is our employee for the time being, he needs to heed our voices and proceed accordingly. If this sort of outburst happened in a corporate setting he would be summarily dismissed for cause.

He's a big man when he screams at this poor woman, but he has no character when it comes to supporting his own children... Typical Tea Party PHONY!

Who does Joe Walsh want us to blame? If it talks like a dirtbag and looks like a dirtbag.....just sayin'

Wow - just wow. And to think he won by a 'mandate'. Ok pal, time to go away.

Based on Mr. Joe Walsh's response to my previous letter, I believe it's safe to say that Joe has a sixth sense that grants him an uncanny—almost supernatural—ability to smell at a distance the blood of the vulnerable. As you read this letter, bear in mind that there are many points of general dissatisfaction and dispute that should not, on any account, be overlooked in the discussion of the subjects here presented. One of these is that as long as the beer keeps flowing and the paychecks keep coming, Joe's cultists don't really care that in asserting that his blessing is the equivalent of a papal imprimatur, Joe demonstrates an astounding narrowness of vision. To recapitulate, Mr. Joe Walsh does not play nice with others.

There are many problems with Mr. Joe Walsh's analects. The one that's the most blatant, and the one that I will limit my discussion to, is related to his overt support of egotism. One of the first facts we should face is that Joe has declared that he's staging a revolt against everyone who dares to free people from the fetters of neocolonialism's poisonous embrace. Joe is revolting all right; the very sight of him turns my stomach. All kidding aside, he decries or dismisses capitalism, technology, industrialization, and systems of government borne of Enlightenment ideas about the dignity and freedom of human beings. These are the things that Joe fears because they are wedded to individual initiative and responsibility. Finally, any mistakes in this letter are strictly my fault. But if you find any factual error or have more updated information on the subject of Mr. Joe Walsh, Joe-inspired versions of prætorianism, etc., please tell me so I can write an even stronger letter next time.

Why is Mr. Joe Walsh so compelled to complain about situations over which he has no control? If you've ever wondered about the answer to that question, then read on. First and foremost, Joe's ideals should be labeled like a pack of cigarettes. I'm thinking of something along the lines of, "Warning: It has been determined that Joe's paroxysms are intended to glorify arrogant, suppressive, murderous governments as the ideologically correct alternative to all other possibilities." In closing, all that I ask is that you join me to stop Mr. Joe Walsh and invite all the people who have been harmed by Joe to continue to express and assert their concerns in a constructive and productive fashion.

I see his signs in the windows of Horizons for the blind....It makes me sick!!!Why should some one like that get health care and a great salary for his disgusting behavior!!!

Style aside, Mr. Walsh's viewpoint on where this crisis began is correct. Had it not been for liberal and government-driven housing policies, we would not be in this economic situation today. Banks certainly spreaded the risk further, but it started with the political motivation to increase home ownership rates. It is too bad Mr. Walsh's style sometimes overshadows his substance.

Mr. Bush absolutely should have done more to stop the Fannie/Freddie debacle. But at the core, these were liberal housing policies designed to alter the free market. Both parties at fault, but the ideology behind it was liberal.

The banks took a good idea and turned it into for-profit only ventures. They made loans knowing they would create problems, but only saw the bottom line of making money. Affordable housing should be the "American way", but when banks saw their opportunity, they jumped in like sharks.

Uh, Sully! Aren't banks in business to make a profit?

Joe Walsh was right. There were regulations in place, but the SEC didn't do a good job under the Bush administration. I admit Walsh lost his cool and just should have ignored the heckler, but I respect Walsh. He went to DC, didn't get the premium government health care program that all Congressmen receive and shopped for his own. Doesn't own a home or apartment in DC, and lives out of his office in the capitol. Problem is that he represents Illinois, a state that is worthless and doesn't want real change, that's why I got the hell out.

Hopefully, EVERYONE will vote this upcoming election and send a message to this deadbeat dad who hypocritically campaigned on FAMILY values and FISCAL responsibility....He is a lyin' sack of S.

TIM----# 1 PROBLEM ? TOO MANY PEOPLE WHO VOTE PARTY LINE. REGARDLESS WHO IS RUNNING THEY VOTE FOR. I VOTE FOR THE BEST PERSON RUNNING REGARDLESS OF POLITICAL PARTIES.

To all the opposing viewpoints, I'm not necessarily disagreeing. Banks made mistakes and made the problem worse. So did credit agencies by not vetting properly. So did realtors by telling everyone to buy homes to make money. So did homeowners by taking out equity lines to pay for vacations, cars, etc. Everyone got caught up in the money train. But at the core of it all, it all started with politicians who thought the government should be in the business of making everyone a home owner. They crafted liberal-based policies and used the heavy hand of government regulators to push banks into making loans they had no business making (or else discrimination charges, no expansions approved, etc). And the only way the banks accepted was by having the loans backed by the GSEs Fannie/Freddie. Had the government never entered this market, home values would have risen along side the regular inflation rate and we would not have this massive correction. The problem is not Wall Street or the private sector - the problem is liberalism.

I feel Joe's pain because a large majority of the population does not know or even understand the issue. Look at Illinois? We have the same problems caused by our elected "representatives" Congress started the CRA whose goal it was to get low income people into their own homes. It was based on mean income within a community making it possible for people that made LESS than the mean to get mortgages. Basically giving people loans who had little or no history of paying back loans. The banks originally had to make 1 out of 5 mortgages to low income home buyers. That escalated to just about 1 in 2 (50%) During that time I saw people with no money buying homes twice the "amount" as mine with no savings or anything. Their loans flew through - even though I had saved enough money to out right buy my house - my loan took 3 months to close. Fannie / Freddie back the loans to the people who never paid their mortgages. Plus a lot were given mortgages that were interest only so had no investment in their own house. Take some economics course or look at your own finances - how long could you survive by borrowing 40-50% more than you take in? Chris Dodd got lower interest rates than anyone else - how do you think that happened? Barney Franks buddy Franklin Raines at Freddie got a 100 million dollar bonus? Now the government gave banks money for 0% - the banks are LOANING it back to the government at 3% why risk losing money when you don't have to? Liberalism the disease that needs to go

Rick is right. Barney Frank and Chris Dodd are the biggest culprits here.. and just Joe Walsh is furious? we should ALL be furious. and those two (Dodd and Frank) should be in prison...actually, Barney Frank shouldn't even have a job representing the people after his live in boyfriend was busted using their place for prostitution, but that's another story.

FROM DIRECT EXPERIENCE- all the banks expected (and still are expecting) the government to take all the loans the banks didnt want and take them over- They did it in the early 80's with the Resolution Trust Corporation- The banks took hard working good customers and called their loans due and pushed people into BK- So where are you going to find replacement financing in 2008?? They saw an opportunity and they took it..... but no RTC ..... yet. Another example, TARP money... who ever bought other banks with it (hello Wintrust) instead of helping out the general public should have their interest increased by 25%, that wasnt the purpose! I hope I am done going to funerals of friends who killed themselves because of their financial condition brought on by banks..............

@John Walsh - If you want to get into the name calling game, go right ahead. I've stated clearly that the Bush Admin should have stopped it. But it would have taken a very, very courageous group of people to go out and try to stop the money train in ALL industries. Nobody saw this massive correction coming, it was group think on a massive scale.

My point to all the readers is that the very idea that government should play some role in increasing home ownership rates is a centralized, big government, liberal idea. It is not a free market idea. Bush may have been an R, but that doesn't mean all the policies of his admin were conservative. You have to look deeper and separate the party name from the ideology of the policy. My point is to show that the ideology at the core of this problem is liberalism, and that therefore the ideas of liberalism need to be curtailed moving forward. Hopefully, some of the silent majority reading here understands this distinction.

My Question is, What is America coming to if it elects someone like this to public Office. He needs a good reality Check ( And a smack upside the head).

Is it possible that there is more than one culprit? One of the disturbing aspects of the housing crash was the massive leverage on the derivatives. The banks were selling these insurance policies with the belief that the housing market could never go down. When it did they were so over leveraged that collapse was unavoidable without a government bailout. They were like "The Producers" selling too many shares in a risky venture. For them it was a cash cow until it wasn't and the tax payers got stuck holding the bag. What is disturbing about Mr. Walsh is his narrow focus on any issue as though complexity does not exist. The yelling of course just makes him look foolish.

If you were an executive and the heavy hand of government made you do something, wouldn't your desire to stay in business and your entrepreneurial nature try to find a way to minimize your risks? Banks knew the govt-forced loans were crap, so they purchased insurance. AIG made the mistake of taking all comers, and unfortunately the entire industry was on their back.

Keith, You are absolutely correct. There is blame all around. Republicans, Democrats and the citizens of the US. Clinton wanted everyone to have the American dream and Bush failed to ensure the stop gaps were in place. Obama, and the TARP that the banks took and spent on themselves with big bonuses. The citizens were over extending themselves when the banks told them "Sure you can afford at 425K house." and here is your loan payment of 3,750/month on your 3,800/month salary. The banks took advantage of the citizens who wanted the bigger house but could not afford it. Plenty of blame to go around!

This whole "Blame the Banks" campaign is a smokescreen to cover up the blame that goes to Congress for the collapse of the housing market. When U.S. Rep. Barney Frank and former U.S. Senator Chris Dodd abused the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac federal programs to force banks to give risky loans to unqualified applicants when those applicants could never afford the monthly mortgage payments, the housing bubble burst and it ruined the lives of reasonable homeowners everywhere. And yet Franks and Dodd were NEVER held accountable for destroying the housing market. Nooooo, this was all the fault of the "greedy banks".

All you Republicants who keep saying it was Frank/Dodd's blame, show us ONE SHRED of evidence where either your little darling Georgie Bush OR the banks resisted any of this....The truth is, they didn't.....Georgie knew it was the ONLY thing (the inflated housing market) keeping his fraudulent economy afloat, which is the same reason he told immigration to look the other way with the FLOOD of illegals that came over to provide cheap labor so his friends could get richer off of that......The banks were/are greedy, they didn't resist either, they were too busy raking in TONS of money off any mandates of that era, PLUS they were scamming on their own also.
Try to find ANYWHERE where Republicants tried to regulate banks in any way.....save your time, you won't. They already want to undo any regulations put in place to prevent another debacle like the one we still haven't dug ourselves out of.

CRA originally only allowed for the writing of a small percentage of loans be given/written to low income business & families. It was basically like a snow ball that starts at the top being small but about time it gets to the bottom of the hill it's quite big. Both sides of the political asile use it when it benefits them. What happened while the ball was rolling down the hill was those loans could now be insured! Greed took over - yes - but the ball got it's push down the hill from Congress.

May I suggest listening to This American Life radio show called Giant Pool of Money. This program won a Peabody Award and I think should be required (OK not required..) listening. In short the world market was looking for safe investments with interest rates held low by the Fed to encourage spending, Wall street saw a cash cow, Bankers .... If you got an hour (perfect for multi-tasking!) give it a listen.
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/355/the-giant-pool-of-money

But the congress made them do it!

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/whistleblower-lawsuit-takes-on-banks-nationwide-that-cheated-taxpayers-veterans-out-of-hundreds-of-millions-of-dollars-2011-10-04

Nightcrawler, maybe you should watch the documentary "Maxed Out." It focused on people who NEVER should have had home loans or home equity loans to begin with.

I recall one woman, who--after Obama won the election in 2008--bragged that now she wouldn't have to worry about putting gas in her car or paying her mortgage. I wonder how that's working for her now. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI

Thanks Sully...."This is a massive fraud on the American taxpayers and American veterans," said co-lead counsel in the case, James E. Butler, Jr., of the Atlanta law firm Butler, Wooten & Fryhofer LLP. "Knowing they weren't allowed to charge the fees, the banks and mortgage companies inflated allowable charges to hide these illegal fees without telling the veterans who were the borrowers or the VA they were doing so." Corporate welfare and Corporate cheating are the bigger problems. Regulation and prosecution are the solutions - both of which Kamakazi Joe Walsh opposes.

Nightcrawler, no, the youtube video doesn't pertain to the film, but it shows the mentality of some people who got loans they couldn't afford and how they expect our government to bail them out. I agree with you that some parts of the banking industry need to be overhauled. This idea that everyone deserves to buy a house is BS--some people just can't afford the payments and the banks should know that. NINJA loans were a major problem--"no income, no job--approved." Fannie and Freddie need to be held accountable for the bad loans they approved. Wasn't Barney's live-in involved with one of those two? Their actions were criminal, at best.

and this weekend....one woman in attendance asked whether veterans of foreign wars who were part of Occupy Wall Street were anti-American. Walsh said yes.

So, there you have it. Disresprecting the men and women who served this nation.