100 Comments

1. 11B40:

Greetings:

Many years ago, I saw one of W.C. Fields’ films entitled, “You Can’t Cheat an Honest Man.” I don’t actually remember the gist of the film, but the title stuck with me as a bit of a life lesson. You see, I interpreted it to mean that an honest man knows what he is entitled to and desires nothing more or less. This mind set, in turn, makes him invulnerable to the blandishments of those who would corrupt or manipulate him for their own purposes.

While there are certainly degrees of malfeasance in this “Wall Street Mess,” like any good Ponzi scheme, more than the originators were and are working the angles. I think summing up the “Mess” as something nefarious done by political or financial elites, however accurate, absolves the lesser partakers of opportunity and I don’t think that that is the life lesson we currently need.

Part of our culture that is being eroded is our commitment to individual responsibility. Too easy credit and too easy bankruptcy are more responsibility than many people can handle. A contract is no longer a matter of personal honor.

Sep 28, 2008 - 7:15 pm 2. tbogg:

Oh Richard, do keep up.

Jesus. You guys at PJM are just mailing it in lately. It’s like you’ve lost the will to actually do a minimum of work. Or was that the business plan all along?

Sep 28, 2008 - 7:51 pm 3. Michael Rittenhouse:

The idea of blaming “all of us” is a way to avoid blaming those who did the deeds and reaped their ill-gotten gains.

This is also a cheap rhetorical device, an excuse for not getting to the bottom of the question.

You nailed it in your response: Washington policymaking is so far removed from most of us that the rhetorical “we” have no control over it.

If asked, “Would you loan thousands of your dollars to someone without first obtaining proof of his ability to pay you back?” the answer would be, No. (Interestingly, I am confronted with that question weekly in trying to sell my parents’ house, when people want me to offer “owner financing” because they can’t qualify for a real mortgage.) But deep in the bowels of federal policymaking, the answer became “Why not?” and so here we are.

When Mitsubishi delved into sub-prime financing years ago (I’m too cheap to pay for a Factiva search for the WSJ article link, sorry), they paid dearly with parking lots full of repossessed automobiles. The campaign produced some great TV ads, which attracted mostly youngsters with bad or no credit scores, who signed on to buy new cars in record numbers and then promptly quit making payments.

At least Mitsubishi paid for their mistake with their own shareholders’ capital. If I’m to be a “shareholder” in bad mortgage-making, I want something better in the way of say-so than my Congressman’s assurance he’s doing the right thing.

Sep 28, 2008 - 8:07 pm 4. ic:

tbogg: Does a McCain advisor’s involvement excuse Dodd, Obama, Frank, and various politicians’ behavior so that they can blame the American people for the mess? Remember this: Dodd, Obama, and Frank are legislators, they were lobbied to impose laws on us, lobbied against reforms that caused us to pay $700 billion for the bailout. McCain’s advisor, whatever he had done or not done, has no authority to pass laws, to rob us and our children of $700 billion.

Are you one of those in your face Truth Squad unleashed by Obama to mislead and misdirect attention away from his and Democrats’ culpabilities? Are you so far gone that you can’t recognize facts? Two wrongs don’t make one right. Yeah, in your circle, there are no truth, no facts. Everything is relative, truth and facts can be twisted for the cause.

Sep 28, 2008 - 9:40 pm 5. Pajamas Media » Stop Blaming ‘All of Us’ For This Wall St. Meltdown:

[...] Read the entire story here. [...]

Sep 29, 2008 - 1:52 am 6. Allston:

Immediately, when Barney Frank began to point the finger at anyone and everyone (save himself) during this crisis, the first line that came to mind was, “guilty Dogs bark first.”

Sep 29, 2008 - 2:55 am 7. KG2V:

Some of us looked at the ARMs being offered, and asked ourselves “what happens when they reset?” and went with the conventional 30 year. A subset of thoses said “You say we can qualify for how much? Nah, We think we can only afford about 25% less than that, besides, we want to put 30% down”

We’re getting screwed with the rest, and we didn’t get a McMansion, with granite counters – we got the 60 year old house with the patched formica counters, and the refaced cabinets

I feel like _I’M_ the one who got taken as a sucker with the bailout

Sep 29, 2008 - 3:05 am 8. Ed Wallis:

To add to “ic’s” 9:40pm post:

I hope McCain’s campaign can effectively use Clinton’s changes to the Community Reinvestment Act – begun under Carter – to show Americans what Democrats intended with their politics. Highly recommended video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5tZc8oH–o

Sep 29, 2008 - 3:41 am 9. Marina:

It’s like with the debate: first the MSM declare the victory of Obama, but when they see it doesn’t sell well – “OK, nobody has won”. What actually means McCain has won, according to the REAL POLLS over two questions:
1. Whom you see as a winner of the debate?
2. Do you believe the MSM when they say it was Obama?

Being a part of Obama campaign the MSM will never say McCain has won.
But they cannot lie too boldly because the loss of credibility will turn to a loss of a manipulative tool for Obama. So: “Let’s call it a tie”.

This situation is exactly the same. The dems tried to blame the reps for the Wall Street desaster. It seemed to work first (although, who knows? we had the results only from some faked polls of the MSM). But then the truth started to spread, especially about Fanny and Freddie connections with Obama himself. The REAL POLLS say dems loose this battle (which actually is very good news). That’s why they play this “tie-game” with us again. But this time it is called “nobody is specially to blame” = “everybody is”.

This is disgusting, but also shows that Obama and dems LOSE in internal polls. Not bad after all, isn’t it?

Sep 29, 2008 - 3:41 am 10. Boris:

The argument that banks were “forced” to make bad loans is a simple rewriting of history. Most of the bad loans had nothing to do with the CRA and even those that did would likely have been made anyway.

Sep 29, 2008 - 4:19 am 11. Stop Blaming Us For Wall Street : Simply Conservative:

[...] going on television and blaming the American people for the trouble on Wall Street. Apparently, I’m not the only one. Rep. Barney Frank was elected by a majority of the people of  his district in Massachusetts. [...]

Sep 29, 2008 - 4:31 am 12. Dane:

Boris:

“Most of the bad loans had nothing to do with the CRA and even those that did would likely have been made anyway.”

Question: Why would a bank make what is undeniably a bad investment by allowing someone to take out a mortgage that they clearly could not pay back?

Answer: Because these mortgages were essentially guaranteed to be purchased from the bank by a GSE (Government-Sponsored Enterprise, like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) as part of a deliberate policy to create more equity in the housing market.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC0A96F958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1

Sep 29, 2008 - 4:33 am 13. Tina Trent:

It’s patently ridiculous, and sloppily so, to single out Dodd and Frank for a fiscal policy (under-girded by a fiscal ideology) that was implemented almost exclusively at the behest of the Republican Party, by Republican elected officials.

That’s not to say that Democrats didn’t belly up to the trough. But Republicans believed in the trough, invented the trough, built the trough, and delivered the trough to Washington. Whole-hog, as it were. This is another Republican-driven deregulation mess.

Here’s how it works: Republicans, pining for the S & L days, reject Democratic principles about regulation, screaming that it is sadistically restraining free markets. Democrats, always ready to be second in line to throw the middle-class off the cliff, demand, in return for endorsing policies that benefit the uber-rich, set-asides for the flagrant poor.

Meanwhile the middle-class goes about its business until it gets smacked between the eyes, once again, by the Parties’ twin constituencies of special honor — sleazy race-baiters on one side, economic sleaze-bags on the other.

It’s insulting to readers to selectively point fingers at Dodd and Frank. It’s not particularly different from what others on the Right and Left are doing — pointing at the other side, only, as if that isn’t pie on their fingers, but I expect more from Minter.

Sep 29, 2008 - 4:48 am 14. Rubicon:

As a former “banker” I promise any & all banks were “FORCED” to make these loans. The threats were daily for the first three years, and after that all just accepted their fate. I was there, I heard the threats. I watched as loan officers lost their jobs &/or were demoted because they failed to make enough loans to those “qualified” under the CRA. Its not untrue, its fact!
Many in the financial industry just got on board rather than suffer the consequences of being labeled racist. It did happen no matter how many say it did not.
Those loans were of poor quality & no amount of complaining did any good at all.
Barney Frank often blocked attempts to regulate the industry. Dodd worked on blocking from the Senate side.
Many times both parties can be blamed, but on this one it belongs to Democrats. It should also put to bed the notion that only Republicans are doing business with business. The Democrats have profited handsomely from financial industry campaign contributions & help. They are just as it not more in those pockets.
Many will counter what I say here, but “I” was there.

Sep 29, 2008 - 5:03 am 15. Bill in NY:

no doubt the crooks in Washington DC lined their pockets and used Fannie and Freddie to finance their ponzi scheme, ala “friends of Angelo”, and they should all be in jail. However, when the American voters allow it to happen on their watch, it is in fact our fault. Now, you can bitch all day long that you are not a crook… but how come the crooks are now going to get MORE money, and MORE regulations? The American people are going to get what they ask for, one way or the other, and we’re all going to have to live with the consequences. Until or unless the American people demand accountability, we shall indeed reap what we sow.

Sep 29, 2008 - 5:04 am 16. Ed Wallis:

Beg to differ, “Tina T” 4:48am.

It was Pres. Clinton – A DEMOCRAT…until Leftists try to re-write MORE “history” -who “altered” the Community Reinvestment Act to require banks/lending organizations to take on these bad loans.

Please see link posted at 3:41am (10 minute video). Thanks.

Sep 29, 2008 - 5:04 am 17. Eagle Eye:

We have the dumbest politician’s in the history of the US. They get caught with their finger’s in the cookie jar, then offer to fill the empty jar back up with our money so they can have the friend of their’s (Acorn) to grab some more for them. So when it come’s down to the 95% of people voting these idiot’s into office, they had ten years to get their handout’s, now go get your own job and start contributing to
the society you have been bottom feeding from .

Sep 29, 2008 - 5:10 am 18. ehunter:

Lets look at what the middle class has been asked to do the past 20 years.
1. Accept without a stir mass immigration that will take the future away from them and their children.
2. Pay over and over for Wall Street rescue
plans while Wall Street and Corporate America
crank up the propaganda machine proclaiming
the wonders of the “free market”, especially when their bonuses and golden parachutes are
at stake.
3. Accept it when their educational system and culture is hijacked by left wing hacks whose dearest goal is to destroy the lives of those who are paying their salaries.

And on and on and on

Sep 29, 2008 - 5:11 am 19. Eagle Eye:

Tina, Where do you get your info from. the obama campaign,

Sep 29, 2008 - 5:13 am 20. Terry Gain:

I’m tired of conservative people referring to this as a Wall Street Meltdown.

Wall Street did not create fraudulent government backed mortgages.

Wall street did not institute liberal lending policies where mortgage money was doled out without regard to ability to pay.

Wall Stree did not drive up the cost of housing with these easy to get mortgages.

Put the blame where it belongs: CRA, Carter, Clinton, Cuomo, Dodd, Frank, Raines, Gorelick and Obama. For sarters. This is their baby.

And even as they addressed the need for a bailout to save the financial system – not just Wall Steet – from collapse the Democrats attempted to insert a provision in the bailout to divert $900 million to their dirty friends at Acorn.

The Democrats bailout proposal is like a rapist agreeing to stop as long as he gets a blow job.

They are shameless abd will continue to be unless conservative commentators get the truth out.

Lord knows the MSM certainly isn’t going to stop covering for the Dems.

Sep 29, 2008 - 5:15 am 21. RustyG:

Does this mean I can quit paying my mortgage now? Where do I sign up for a bailout?

Sep 29, 2008 - 5:20 am 22. Eagle Eye:

Today should be considered US National spin day. try not to get dizzy listening to the politician’s and pundit’s

Sep 29, 2008 - 5:22 am 23. Tom H:

eagle eye – Sorry, but these politicians are not dumb – looks like whatever plan they had worked out swell for them – at some point we have to ask is this a deliberate effort? I believe it is – and 50% of the US wants to elect the O for more….

Sep 29, 2008 - 5:48 am 24. 888:

Former Fannie Mae chairman and CEO, Franklin Raines, who received $90 million in 6 years at Fannie Mae and millions more in bonuses, recently agreed to a multimillion dollar settlement with a federal regulator over his alleged responsibility for improper accounting and cooking the books at the mortgage finance giant.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/washbizblog/2008/04/regulator_to_dismiss_charges_a.html

Franklin Raines today advises Obama on housing issues.

Another former Fannie Mae CEO, Jim Johnson, who was involved in the accounting scandal at Fannie Mae with Raines and recently resigned from Countrywide for engaging in illegalities there, now works for Obama’s campaign.

http://digitalartpress.wordpress.com/2008/09/09/obama-against-severance-for-fannie-mae-freddie-mac-except-his-friend-jim-johnson/

Obama sure knows how to pick them. He’s not only friends with terrorists, racist pastors and convicted slumlords who rip off black apartment dwellers in Chicago, he’s also chums with rich, corrupt thieves who for years stole from taxpayers and gave hush money to Obama. To this day, Obama has not said a word about his friends, Raines and Johnson, knowing full well their mismanagement and corrupt practices had a lot to do with the downfall of the government housing giants.

This is a matter of judgment, character and leadership. Wake up, America.

Sep 29, 2008 - 5:49 am 25. crossover:

Bill Clinton seems anxious to get McCain elected president- calling him a great man.
No comment for Obama.
If McCain gets elected and the country goes into a depression or long haul recession. People will be living in so called McCain shacks/tent cities and long lines at soup kitchens. Everyone will forget Dodd, Frank and Bill.
Clinton says- McCain for President!

Sep 29, 2008 - 6:07 am 26. RE:

To the extent that we tolerate incompetent, malicious, corrupt, and delusional government bureaucrats enacting social engineering debacles design to enrich themselves, we are indeed responsible.

If we allow Frank, Dodd, Gorelick, Raines, and Johnson to walk form this, we are indeed responsible.

We get what we settle for. Complacency Kills.

Sep 29, 2008 - 6:14 am 27. tom:

Isn’t it interesting that there are no investigative committees trying to figure out who is responsible for the bail out. Oh yeah, it’s the democrats that would have to investigate themselves. If it were republicans, the microscope would have been focused in precise detail

Sep 29, 2008 - 6:34 am 28. ex-democrat:

I’m cross-posting this from the other thread: (H/T 888)

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/bush-mccain-tried-to-reform-housing-finance

devastating

Sep 29, 2008 - 6:54 am 29. Freddie Funky:

I agree with Tom. Where are the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac investigations? Their changes in regulations so they could buy substandard loans is at the heart of the mess. I want to see jailtime for the management of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac.

Sep 29, 2008 - 6:58 am 30. john from cinncinati:

if Mccain gets elected we will be living in Mc shacks and Mctents. thats Mcfunny. can we get a Mcdemocrat to get us a Mcmortgage? how do you know this? are you Miss McCleo. the only thing Mcdemocrats/Mcliberals are good for is Mcname calling
Mcbama for dogcatcher 08 there’s a job thats in his Mcpaygrade

Sep 29, 2008 - 7:01 am 31. Laurent:

The greatest fraction of the bad loans were caused by out and out fraud, which has been illegal all along. Examples: “liars’ loans”- stated income and/or stated assets mortgages,speculators who lied and swore on their mortgage applications that they intended to use the house as their primary residence, “one stop shops” in minority neighborhoods, with crooked appraisers, crooked real estate agents, crooked lawyers and crooked mortgage brokers, all under one roof. The list goes on and on. But all the crooked mortgage applications are still on file: investigate them and try and imprison the perpetrators!

Sep 29, 2008 - 7:10 am 32. ehunter:

Is this actual case that unusual?
The house across the street is in foreclosure.
The former occupants were black and were never seen to go to work, and so presumably they had no jobs to go to. Once they vacated premises they trashed everything on the way out, including taking the proverbial kitchen sink, and in this case also the cabinets off the walls as well as the appliances that came with the house. I knew what was coming when late last summer RepoMan Towing Service Ltd. hauled away the Escalade. The mailbox is overflows with red bordered envelopes from
Capital One Credit Services, Apple Vacations, and Nordstroms that are screaming OVERDUE!! How unusual is all this?

Sep 29, 2008 - 7:20 am 33. Jarhead:

Tina Trent – What regulations did Republicans block and how would they have prevented bad mortgages? Please be specific, I am curious.

Sep 29, 2008 - 7:21 am 34. ate mely:

Absolutely right! No, we didn’t cause this Wall Street mess. My local, conservatively run bank still standing. Wrote off $25m of MBS early this year and recalculate conservatively.

Sep 29, 2008 - 7:26 am 35. hp:

“We demanded cheap loans for houses we couldn’t afford”

“The idea of blaming “all of us” is a way to avoid blaming those who did the deeds and reaped their ill-gotten gains.”

man, you ain’t kiddin’. i had someone do the virtual version of screaming at me online recently over a statement i made about a very related topic. i dumped it right back in their lap.

THEY made the conscious choice to approve the loans for those they are now griping over.

THEY were in the driver’s seat to know if someone was or was not capable of affording said loans long term.

THEY were the ones unscrupulously helping loan applicants fudge applications so they would be approved.

all for the $$ bonus that would end up in their OWN pockets roping in another desperate soul.

ps my attacker shut up immediately. end of discussion!

Sep 29, 2008 - 7:35 am 36. harry:

For several years I looked to relocate to another home. I watched as home prices skyrocketed in the NYC area. Totally absurd prices that just kept on rising. In my area people were knocking down 2 family homes to build six story condos. Just recently this happened near me even after the housing meltdown was in full swing. In other areas I saw brand new developments for middle to upper middle class people being snapped up like ipod’s. People bought them with a down payment of 50K and waited 6 months or more until the home was built. By then the prices were going for 50K or more. I’m sure many people bought these homes like people bought stock, thinking they’ll sell it before moving in and making a cool 50K or more profit. I imagine this went on in many cities especially in California and Florida and many other locations. I didn’t buy anything because prices were too high. I’m not the poorest guy but I believed prices were just too rediculous. Some homes were beautiful and as I rode by them I thought to myself sh*t I couldn’t afford such a home if they gave it to me. The point being made here is that we are all to blame. No one forced me to buy a home much less one I couldn’t afford. People were greedy from top to bottom. The gov’t for offering sub prime loans. Mortgage cos. for their creative financing schemes. People who bought homes just to make a quick profit. People who demolished small homes to make grand condos. People who were given homes they couldn’t afford. People who bought homes they couldn’t afford. Just like the high tech boom of the 90’s which busted because idiots invested in companies worth less than a million but were capitalized for a billion so idiots invested in buildings that were way overpriced and didn’t pay attention to the market. A correction was long overdue. An investing mania has hit this world ever since the 90’s. First high tech stocks, then homes, then oil. Who knows what’s next. What irks me is watching the tube and having someone like Herr Olbermann on MSNBC continuously blame the usual suspects. That being Wall Street Bush and the Republicans. Or watching the idiot Bill Maher, his panel of morons and his audience of bigger morons bashing the usual suspects. They act just like Pavlov’s dogs, using no thought but conditioned response. We are all to blame folks, no one agency.

Sep 29, 2008 - 7:49 am 37. Self-hating boomer:

We demanded cheap loans for houses we couldn’t afford

Who this “we”, moonbat?

This whole affair reminds me of Harry Browne’s famous quote:

Government is good at one thing: It knows how to break your legs, hand you a crutch, and say, “See, if it weren’t for the government, you wouldn’t be able to walk”.

Sep 29, 2008 - 7:56 am 38. Chuck in Ca:

Do we really believe that the small, yes, small number of ‘mcmansions’ are responsible for the 700 billion ‘bailout’? Is there any difference between a homeowner, who has a choice between paying rent at some market price vs the same monthly payment while hoping the value goes up on the house, and the stock buyer who buys on margin?
Its easy to say that THEY were the ones responsibe, and i certainly don’t believe they are not, however, if you take the average homeowner who puts, for instance, 20% down on $100,000 house, leaving a balance of $80,000. Said homeowner needs to refinance for whatever reason, but now the house is only worth $80,000. The homeowner is denied the losn, as the LTV is below the bank standard. Now the homeowner is out $20,000; the bank claims a loss on the value of the house for $20,000; and then the bank gets a handout of another $20,000 to make up for the lost value. If the banks had relaxed their standards to give good psying customers the opportunity to refinance, THEY wouldnt have put us in the mess we’re in.
And don’t forget, this mess also hits commercial properties, of which a vast majority are multi-family homes.

Sep 29, 2008 - 7:58 am 39. Richard:

If Obama is elected then political “stockholm syndrome” will become a fact! (It’s all our fault, don’t stop.)

Sep 29, 2008 - 8:01 am 40. Charlie (Colorado):

There are two essential problems with this analysis: it is factually false and morally unwise.

And that’s a problem why? It sounds like the whole New York Times editorial position.

Sep 29, 2008 - 8:32 am 41. Charlie (Colorado):

Tbogg, the other little problem there (see “factually false and morally unwise”) is that the whole story is actually untrue. Rick Davis left his firm in 2006, hasn’t been a registered lobbyist since 2005, and has never worked for Fannie and Freddie.

Sep 29, 2008 - 8:45 am 42. mee:

this is so ridiculous…I just saw on c-span Barney Frank say that in 7 years of Republicans
ein congress not once was regulations of GSE brought up and in a half of a year the DEMS. have brought it up has it not seen the video from 2005 where Mudd ceo of fannie mae is talking of $$$ troubles???( Obama is present)and the video from 2005 where Armando Falcom and Rep. Shays are asking for more regulations..of course Maxine Waters and Barney Frank are saying baloney as well as Meeks..now I see the same ones brown-nosing Frank still and he is still misleading people….

Sep 29, 2008 - 8:49 am 43. always right:

I have just one observation -

The Majority hasn’t been angry enough.

Sep 29, 2008 - 8:50 am 44. G-Ma:

Suggestion!! We should start a e-mail campaign to our Congressman demanding an investigation of Frank, Dodd and principles that created this mess and how deep their hand was in the proverbial pocket.
It amazes me that liberals refuse to acknowlege the truth and blame
everything on Bush or McCain. McCain has only one vote in the Senate
and Bush can’t veto a majority vote. High school civics! What has the
Democratic controlled Congress done to fix this mess? This didn’t start
last week.

Sep 29, 2008 - 8:51 am 45. John:

Bailout Plan- 700 billion, one time.

Military Budget – 612 billion, every year.

Sep 29, 2008 - 8:54 am 46. ajacksonian:

I did not take an ARM or other absolutely insane pay-off scheme to get a couple of years of low interest and then see the rates skyrocket afterwards. I took prudent stock of my finances, my assets and saw what I can afford and went for that so I could get a roof over my head. That meant renting for a few years. Then looking at what my modest pay could get me in the hopes I would do better economically as time went on.

When Congress intervened to make ‘home ownership affordable’ they forgot that getting a home is a liberty, not a right: it is something you can have if you work for it, invest and plan for it. The Left threw the mentally unsound out from bad institutions and on to the streets to demonstrate that we have no responsibility for housing as a ‘civil right’. Instead of reforming asylums they went draconian and gave us insight into what are liberties are: those things we can provide for ourselves with sound mind. Society was supposed to care for those with unsound minds, but that went to government and then to no one. Now we hear complaints about ‘the homeless’ and those who cannot afford a home. That is what charity is for, exercise liberty for that and get bias out of government in the way of financing private home ownership.

Now we have inept government, utilizing its influence to corrupt politics and society and then blame it on the people. And that government demands more of your money to back its schemes, that benefit the powerful in Congress and their cronies in corrupt government backed institutions. That is then forced on Wall Street through changing regulatory oversight and moving from sound financial views to unsound practices. When do we get the ‘perp walk’ for those in Congress that led this debacle?

And when will the legislation that permitted and backed this get repealed so it can’t happen again? Show me the goods, first, before you ask for a payout. That should be damned easy… and yet we hear no one asking for that. Place the blame on those in power who bent the laws to their whims and the whims of their cronies in both parties.

Change the laws.

Do the perp walks.

And fix the infrastructure that allowed this, first.

Then talk about a ‘bailout.’

Sep 29, 2008 - 9:04 am 47. JMH:

“After all, these scoundrels did not elect themselves”

Rep. Barney Frank was elected by a majority of the people of his district in Massachusetts. Senator Chris Dodd is brought to us by many but not all of the voters of Connecticut. And so on. Most of us never had the chance to vote for or against these solons. So why should we be blamed?

Well, the blame the rest of us deserve is that we never elected someone else to the House or the Senate who would kick Dodd and Frank’s asses and put an end to their corruption. “We” need to stop worrying about electing people who will vote the way we want on our pet issues and start worrying about electing people who will fight the corruption. Democrats are using taxpayer money to line their pockets, fund their campaigns, and build institutions that will further their power. And we vote for the Right To Life candidate who promises a tax cut and a border fence.

Well, I agree with the Right To Life and I like tax cuts, and think illegal immigration is a problem, but those ain’t the top priorities right now, fellow conservatives. They haven’t been for a while. The top priority right now is dismantling the Democrat political machine that is destroying American confidence in our own country and attempting to create a permanent institutional power base through redistribution programs that create dependants for them while simultaneously making them and their top supporters wealthy. The top priority is putting the Dodds and Franks where they belong, if not in jail at least out of any position of trust within the US Government.

So, we are to blame. We’ve been putting our own concerns above those of honest government. Good men doing nothing, and all that.

Sep 29, 2008 - 9:04 am 48. Just Say No To FOX:

tbogg: Does a McCain advisor’s involvement excuse Dodd, Obama, Frank, and various politicians’ behavior so that they can blame the American people for the mess? Remember this: Dodd, Obama, and Frank are legislators, they were lobbied to impose laws on us, lobbied against reforms that caused us to pay $700 billion for the bailout. McCain’s advisor, whatever he had done or not done, has no authority to pass laws, to rob us and our children of $700 billion.

Are you one of those in your face Truth Squad unleashed by Obama to mislead and misdirect attention away from his and Democrats’ culpabilities? Are you so far gone that you can’t recognize facts? Two wrongs don’t make one right. Yeah, in your circle, there are no truth, no facts. Everything is relative, truth and facts can be twisted for the cause.

McCain is Also A legislator. All Mac has is lobbyist around him. Show me the votes that Obama made contrary to McCains votes. That Screwed the country especially the working and middle class.

It had been a Republican congress the last 12 years prior to the 2 years under the dems.

The candidates should change opinions based on circumstance. But you wanna be GOPers have changed every stance you have had for the last 9 years. What do you stand for?

It’s over! Start working on impeaching Obama instead. Well thats what you did as soon as The last Dem won the house. Country first my A$$.

This site is not foaming with all the bloodsucking neo-cons anymore. Even they see the paper thin GOP with no base.

Palin Who?

The only thing that was conservative about McCain was he was a military man. Not anymore. Everyone heard him say he was going to cut the Defense budget. We may know Obama less but you can never know McCain.

Also all you Drill now folks I hope you now realize it’s about refining. They cut production when we started conserving. See folks the market and Big Oil control that price regardless. Dare I say we need reform. Oh sorry that would be socialist. We’ll just take all the bad socialism. Like Govt buyouts.

The truth hurts because you need your belief system intact. Thats why the truth in your face annoys you.

Sep 29, 2008 - 9:05 am 49. Therese:

We need to fight back! Have you noticed that no one has called for an investigation? Why? Because the Democrats control Congress and an investigation would point back at them, too. So, they are not going to do anything.

We can fight back! If Obama is elected, he will not do anything either. In fact, I believe that he will just be a puppet of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. However, if McCain is elected, we have a chance of getting an investigation into this matter. How?

If the majority of Americans who are mad about the bailout vote for McCain, then McCain’s polls will surge. The media will have to find out why and they will discover that it’s because of the bailout. Thus, if McCain wins, he will have a mandate to do something about investigating the real sources of the problem and “clean house.” What we really need is a cleaning out of the corruption in our government too!

Why can’t we do the same thing but vote Obama? Because Obama is inexperienced and in the Democratic party pocket. The Democrats won’t let him. And even if Obama wanted to do something, he doesn’t know enough about Washington politics to make it happen. He will be the puppet of Pelosi and Reid. Obama has always been a “go along, get along” candidate. He’s not going to change now.

However, McCain is a maverick. He knows Washington’s tricks and tactics. Thus, he would be better equipped to do something about it. When you add his “outsider” running mate, Palin, you now have a team that has a track record for fighting even their own party to make changes.

I believe that we shouldn’t take this whole bailout thing lying down and need to fight back with our votes. Our best bet is the maverick McCain.

Sep 29, 2008 - 9:06 am 50. cedarford:

I wish the hyper-partisans would stop trying to make this a “purely DEMOCRAT!” problem.

It was only 3 years ago that the clueless Dubya, backed by a smiling contingent of corporatist-bought Republicans was in front of cameras touting the “Ownership Society”. Where Bush said the “american dream” was best realized if each and every American owned their own home and thus became a responsible, productive citizen and his goal and his Party’s was to help dramatically expand home ownership, to get banks to lend small business loans to “hard-working immigrants” that may have no credit, and “more tax cuts, more trickledown…”

I disagree with Miniter. People DO get the government they deserve.

If they are angry-stupid enough, or fat+dumb+compacent enough to turnover control of their lives to a Castro, a mix of powerful crony corporatists and transnationalist Jewish progressives, or mindlessly single-issued on a subject like abortion…..they are effectively bent over and waiting to be screwed.

The popular joke now is that Bush’s greatest foul-up now appears to be his failure to LET radical Muslims nuke Manhattan and DC.

It is a systemic failure by Ruling Elites of both parties and as the rapid decline of America as a world power continues and people’s standard of living erodes – we have to ask if it is time for a 5th American Revolution (Jacksonian Democracy 2nd, Civil War was the 3rd, FDR’s peaceful revolution 4th) and major revisions to the US Constitution. On matters like making Presidential line-item vetos possible, imposing national term limits, ending lifetime Fed judicial appoinments, driving moneyed interests out of controlling American domestic and foreign policy.

Jefferson thought periodic revolutions were necessary since no generation could anticipate challenges to future generations or forceably bind them to long-dead people’s laws and constitutions.

It will take a decline in American standard of living, a drop from great nation status, and recognition that democracy has been ripped away from the masses – to start significant structural change. Unfortunately for domestic tranquility and a natural desire to let “the big shots” work matters out, all three of these things appear to be happening.
Add in that the Amending process is broken. No Constitutional change in the face of any organized opposition has been permitted to pass since 1962 (the poll tax) – 46 years ago. And we have had a government incapable of fiscal responsibility and solving structural problems since the mid-70s.

Get ready. It won’t likely be a Revolution of rural gun owners and survivalists – but a mass movement of people convinced that their children’s lives will be poorer and worse-off than their own. Staging general strikes, boycotts, tax rebellions – finishing breaking down the system until change is forced.

Sep 29, 2008 - 9:07 am 51. Chuck Pelto:

TO: tbogg
RE: Orders of Magnitude

So Rick Davis is a lobbyist whose firm received $300K in business from Freddie Mac. And now Rick Davis is the campaign manager for McCain.

On the other hand, Obama’s campaign has received how much money from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae? Then he has two former CEOs from those firms as part of his advisory team? On economics?

There’s a ‘tad’ of a difference. And that’s a rather BIG TAD.

Your efforts at equivalence are a ‘tad’ off. On an analogous nature of the difference between someone who owned an fertilizer business verses someone who bought a s—load of fertilizer from the first guy, made a bomb and blew up a building full of people with said fertilizer.

Hope that helps….but…well…I understand how you people are with facts and logic…..

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Prevaricator, n., A liar in the larval form.]

Sep 29, 2008 - 9:51 am 52. RE:

It most definitely is the Democrat social engineering experiments that created this problem and that, coupled with their ‘fox guarding the henhouse’ caliber of oversight that nouirished the corruption. Yes, we can assign some blame on the passivity of ‘Compassionate Conservatism’, but to gauge the degree to which blame can be assigned, follow the money. Which politicians were these GSE’s sending money to? In what circles to these GSE execs travel?

All Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac reform attempts came from the right. All reform attempts were blocked by the Democrats. We see the same with Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. That seems to be a recurring pattern.

As a result of this expensive debacle, Dodd and Frank need to be canned. Gorelick, Johnson and Raines need investigation and prosecution. If it turns out a Republican in complicit in this by all means procescute them also!

Sep 29, 2008 - 9:57 am 53. John Moore:

I am surprised that not one commenter has mentioned the “creative” financial instruments that Wall Street has been engaging in for a couple of decades. The instruments didn’t cause the mortgage meltdown, but they are causing the financial contagion from that which affects the ability of the entire system to function.

Read “The Trillion Dollar Meltdown” to get a quick intro on this.

The blame goes all over the place:government for not properly regulating Frannie; individuals for engaging in risky and even fraudulent real estate transactions; mortgage intermediaries who sold lousy loans but had no need to service them; Wall Street traders for taking home obscene money while trading in ever more esoteric derivatives of other peoples’ money without any recognition of the downside; banks and Wall Street for fraudulently inflating balance sheets through the use of some of these derivatives; government for failing to see the problem and at least calling us on it; the press for, as usual, failing to know a damn thing about the subject and first ignoring a problem that grew over 20 years, and then misleadingly reporting on it now.

Sep 29, 2008 - 9:57 am 54. j. Barnett:

I personally feel the GOV. workers(CONGRESS) should all not get payed until this is payed, each and everyone, they all knew, they all let it go on and on, it’s about time someone takes away there jobs, pensions, saving, let them see what the middle deals with, we pay these people, the money they collect to run for PRESIDENT, the money they make a year, it’s them to blame, take there checkc until this country is out of the red, if they don’t want to do it, firer there asses, believe me they won’t go hungry, looking at some of them a good diet would help them, isn’t it time for CONGRESS, PRESIDENT, V.P.< to tell the AMERICAN PEOPLE WE ARE SORRY< WE”LL PAY THE TAB!!!!!!!!!!

Sep 29, 2008 - 9:57 am 55. Therese:

The only way that we are going to clean out Washington and get to the truth is to elect someone who is willing to take on everyone. This is John McCain. Obama is a “go along, get along” candidate and will be a puppet of Pelosi and Reid who will bury everything about the cause of the bailout. McCain is the best choice for investigating, exposing and cleaning up Washington. Also, McCain knows the tricks that could be used to really fix things up. Obama is too inexperienced and weak.

Sep 29, 2008 - 9:58 am 56. RE:

John Moore,

“Creative” financial instruments are a symptom of the core problem. People are rightfully more concerned with the root cause – which is government corrupting financial responsibility on all levels.

Sep 29, 2008 - 10:36 am 57. GayPatriot » Wall St. Meltdown - There Are People To Blame:

[...] No, “WE” didn’t cause this Wall Street mess – Richard Miniter – PajamasMedia (and yes, this is the whole column printed below) You must be as tired of hearing it as I am.  Somehow, we are all at fault for Wall Street’s meltdown.  We demanded cheap loans for houses we couldn’t afford and voted in corrupt dolts, who took from Fannie Mae and told us what we wanted to hear.  Now, we are getting what we deserve. [...]

Sep 29, 2008 - 10:55 am 58. kg2v:

Another part of the problem someone pointed out to me yesterday. As the USA went from Mfg to a “service” economy, what was the real “service” – Banking. We came up with all these exotic banking instraments so that people would invest with us.

In the mean time places like China have real simple banking – invest with us, we build factories, build “stuff” and pay you with the profits…

Sep 29, 2008 - 11:32 am 59. lee:

It seems like Obama supporters will counter any argument with “You got your information from FOX news” or “The GOP was in power for 12 years so it’s their fault” line of reasoning.

The seeds of chaos were planted during the Clinton administration. Even the New York Times was concerned by government pressure on banks to loan equitably. Barrack Obama, who paints himself as the patron saint of the middle class, would have approved these risky loans in their name.

Obama supporters claim he supported regulation all along. What are these regulations? John Mccain sponsored legislation that south to address this problem in 2005.

Sep 29, 2008 - 11:35 am 60. Sandy Salt:

You guys are making me sick with all this spinning. Everyone is to blame and the writer should start acknowledging it because that is the first step to recovery. If you think either party or presidental candidate is going to make a difference this year you are mistaken because we will have the same criminals running this government on the 5th of November as we do today and will have for at least 2 to 4 more years. Those who bought houses you couldn’t afford, shame on you! Those of you that voted for the career politicians so your area got lots of federal dollars, shame on you! Those of you who voted for the career politicians because you were to lazy to do your homework, shame on you! Those of you that have no idea how much money your Congressman is getting for his vote by lobbyists, shame on you! Those of you who think that Washington should answer your problems, shame on you!

This is America and since the day is was founded it relied on people make the best of what they had and striving to make things better for themselves and their kids. We have gone so off track as to believe the government should help us do this, but up until this latest generation the government was something to be avoided and usually got in the way of the American Dream.

Today, we willingly allow the government to set our schools standards because the government gives the states money. This is insane. We should stop the money from going to the feds in the first place and use it right here at home. Our federal government is bloated with our tax dollars and spends it like there is no tomorrow because for them there isn’t. You want to survive this current crisis then think seriously of voting against career politicians and the lobbyists. Vote against sending any more dollars to the feds until they cut all unnecessary spending and that includes entitlements because they should be a state issue not federal. You start cutting out the federal middleman (pocket liner) then you would have more say in how your money is spent. You would need to make sure that if someone isn’t spending your money correctly they get voted out immediately. Sorry for the rant, but the situation isn’t going to change unless we the people change the way we do business because Washington sure isn’t going to change.

Sep 29, 2008 - 12:00 pm 61. Marc Malone:

I have to agree mostly with Tina Trent. Yes the ‘Pubs helped create this mess, but she overstates their involvement. They didn’t create the trough. They compromised. They wanted deregulation in the 90’s. They wanted money for the Iraq war in the 00’s. In trade, they relaxed lending standards and eliminated redlining. They gave the Dems their social programs. They let reform efforts die.

Last stat I saw said that 12% of the loans given out were to otherwise unqualified individuals. Half of those were in default at the time. With the continuing devaluing of property, more have surely defaulted. This is in addition to normal default rates, as well as others who, now being upside-down in their homes, have chosen to walk away. (Homes seem underpriced now, having lost 50% of their value in some areas. Now’s the time to buy, I think.)

Lenders knew they were bad loans, and so had to find a way to get them off their books. Off to Fannie and Freddie, as well as creating new bundled mortgage securities instruments. By 2004 or so, they knew these bundles were bad, so that’s when you started seeing the bogus accounting flourishing.

It then became a game of musical chairs: keep getting profits as long as you can, get your bonuses and get out before the music stops. All these guys you see highlighted as having gotten theirs, all seem to have gotten out in 2006-2007 (interestingly, including Paulson).

I think the bailout is stupid. The government should set up a fund to provide capital to those few solid banks and such who acted reasonably responsibly. They can use that money to lend to Main Street to keep the cash/credit flowing through the private sectors. Let the stupid investment houses fail.

However, the silver lining to the bailout, is that the next Prez and Congress will be greatly curtailed in their ability to work mischief… theoretically. I’m more sanguine now about the result of the election than previously. I like the idea that the government actually feels how broke they really are. Hopefully, their credit rating will drop just a skosh, and that’ll really put on the brakes.

Sep 29, 2008 - 12:19 pm 62. KansasGirl:

Hey Boris, so basically the socialist libs would have loaned it anyway? Troll be gone.

Sep 29, 2008 - 12:22 pm 63. Terry Gain:

“It will take a decline in American standard of living, a drop from great nation status, and recognition that democracy has been ripped away from the masses – to start significant structural change. Unfortunately for domestic tranquility and a natural desire to let “the big shots” work matters out, all three of these things appear to be happening.
Add in that the Amending process is broken. No Constitutional change in the face of any organized opposition has been permitted to pass since 1962 (the poll tax) – 46 years ago. And we have had a government incapable of fiscal responsibility and solving structural problems since the mid-70s.

Get ready. It won’t likely be a Revolution of rural gun owners and survivalists – but a mass movement of people convinced that their children’s lives will be poorer and worse-off than their own. Staging general strikes, boycotts, tax rebellions – finishing breaking down the system until change is forced.”

People demanding that the government do for them what they won’t do for themselves won’t change anything. The anti-establishment counter- culturalists of the 1960s are now in charge of Congress. And they are far more avaricious and less principled than the parents they so disdained. With a socialist like Obama in the White House prepare for the deluge. Things are going to get a lot worse before they get better for The Instant Gratification Society.

Sep 29, 2008 - 12:33 pm 64. Lyddea:

A couple quotes:

“The President believes that homeownership is the cornerstone of America’s vibrant communities and benefits individual families by building stability and long-term financial security. In June 2002, President Bush issued America’s Homeownership Challenge to the real estate and mortgage finance industries to encourage them to join the effort to close the gap that exists between the homeownership rates of minorities and non-minorities. The President also announced the goal of increasing the number of minority homeowners by at least 5.5 million families before the end of the decade.”

“And so what are the barriers that we can deal with here in Washington? Well, probably the single barrier to first-time homeownership is high down payments. People take a look at the down payment, they say that’s too high, I’m not buying. They may have the desire to buy, but they don’t have the wherewithal to handle the down payment. We can deal with that.”

“I called upon the private sector to help us and help the home buyers. We need more capital in the private markets for first-time, low-income buyers. And I’m proud to report that Fannie Mae has heard the call and, as I understand, it’s about $440 billion over a period of time. They’ve used their influence to create that much capital available for the type of home buyer we’re talking about here. It’s in their charter; it now needs to be implemented. Freddie Mac is interested in helping. I appreciate both of those agencies providing the underpinnings of good capital.”

What president made these speeches? George W. Bush. When did he make these statements? 2004 and 2002, in the hey day of the Republican congress. I know blind partisans cannot be swayed, but for shame. It was on Bush’s watch, exacerbated by his policies and a rubber stamp Republican congress, that this meltdown happened. Man up and learn from your mistakes, you’d do yourselves well to start by admitting them.

Sep 29, 2008 - 12:38 pm 65. Self-hating boomer:

Everyone is to blame and the writer should start acknowledging it because that is the first step to recovery.

This is quite telling. When the talking point becomes “everyone is to blame”, that means we’ve moved beyond “the other guy is to blame” because it’s indefensible, and the arguer is trying to avoid the inevitable “my side is to blame”.

“Everyone is to blame” is basically an admission that the donkey did it.

Sep 29, 2008 - 1:19 pm 66. Monte:

Our country was officially in a recession when Bush took office. 9/11 delivered another blow to the economy. Pelosi asked for a Democratic majority in 2006 and got it. If this bill is so great why did 95 Dems vote against it? None-the-less, there were enough votes to pass until her unhinged partisan rant just before the bill. Compare her comments to Boehner’s.

Sep 29, 2008 - 2:16 pm 67. Charlie (Colorado):

I am surprised that not one commenter has mentioned the “creative” financial instruments that Wall Street has been engaging in for a couple of decades. The instruments didn’t cause the mortgage meltdown, but they are causing the financial contagion from that which affects the ability of the entire system to function.

The thing is, all those were created to reduce the risk of dealing with individual bad mortgages. High credit mortgages mean no need to securitize bad loans and no need to insure them with credit default swaps.

Sep 29, 2008 - 2:20 pm 68. Yo Blair:

Hello,

I am naive conservative European and would like to ask two questions to my Republican friends on this forum.

1) Why did the Republican Party massively vote against the Henry Paulson plan (sponsored by President George W. Bush, a Republican as far as I know)? Does it mean that the Republican Party is going to implode?

2) Why did the Republican base massively opposed the bailout plan? After all, the whole plan is about saving capitalism from itself (and protect a couple of powerful Republican billionaires such as Steve Forbes etc)? I have to say I’m lost. I thought Republicans would favor a plan protecting their 401(k) and the financial system.

I’m not trying to be polemical, just trying to understand (and believe, from abroad, the American situation looks very fuzzy).

Sep 29, 2008 - 2:55 pm 69. David Thomson:

“Everyone is to blame” is basically an admission that the donkey did it.”

That is correct. The Democrats and their propagandists employed by the MSM are simply trying to divert attention away from the Bill Clinton administration which essentially started this mess. If the Republicans could truly be blamed—we would never hear the end of it! No, the Democrats deserve most of the blame.

Sep 29, 2008 - 2:56 pm 70. kabud:

Marina:
very true

Sep 29, 2008 - 3:40 pm 71. Bob Thompson:

I hope Sarah Palin will be well prepared with all this excellent material when she meets Biden.

Sep 29, 2008 - 3:47 pm 72. Believer:

Ed Wallis — the video link in your first post is “no longer available”

It must have been a good one.

Folks, this is what’s in our future – get used to it.

Sep 29, 2008 - 4:10 pm 73. jess...yes.:

“The regulatory changes that led us to this point were the work of lobbyists, bureaucrats and lawmakers including Dodd and Frank and corrupt executives…”

Essentially in all of this we can’t blame a party. We have to blame the system as a whole. And I agree with the quote above, because most of us don’t have access to or the opportunity to have a hand in these regulatory changes and the everday workings of Congress. Yeah, maybe some officials were elected, but the buck stops there. Literally. Once they are in office, we have no control.

Sep 29, 2008 - 4:51 pm 74. Joe C.:

For almost 8 years, we have heard a daily chorus from the Dems and the Media that, “Bush is an idiot!” “Incompetence!” “You can’t believe him!” “Fat cats on Wall Street!” “Tax cuts for the rich!” “Budget deficit!” “Spending!” You get the idea.

This year we’ve jumped from crisis to crisis and we were told bailout to bailout was necessary to avoid catastrophe to catastrophe. All the evidence now suggests that none of it worked.

For more than a decade, conservatives (not the other Republicans, and certainly not Democrats) have been railing against these policies screaming, “We’re spending to much!” “Taxes are too high!” Credit is too easy!” “Too much government intervention!”

Now, all of a sudden (<1 week), we were told that this was a bigger crisis, needing a bigger bailout, to avert a bigger catastrophe. Sound familiar? “Liberalim works. It just hasn’t been tried enough.” Only this time, we need to spend $700-$1,200 billion, nationalize the banking industry, save Europe, fund ACORN, and keep deadbeats in their homes. (BTW, get used to it. This is foreshadowing the coming Obama economy.) Why? Because the same people that the Dems and Media have demonized for a decade need to be saved…at tax payer expense. How? By buying crappy loans forced by the same Congress that was using Fannie and Freddie as their own ATM, and now says, “Trust us.”

So we arrive at today where the rhetoric of the past 8 years has poisoned the credibility of the “Crying wolf” President and Congress so that when they need us, we decide not to believe them, and reject the Obama-Bush Plan. Why? “Cuz, “Bush is an idiot!” “Incompetence!” “You can’t believe him!” “Fat cats on Wall Street!” “Tax cuts for the rich!” “Budget deficit!” “Spending!” Now we’re told that the same constituency that was right all along is to blame for this failure because NOW we decide to believe all that s**t that they said before.

From where I sit, voting NO, albeit risky, was the more rational thing to do based on the above history. After all, if they would have listened to us, we wouldn’t be in this mess. So I’ll trust my instincts on this one, and let the chips fall where they may. I lived through Jimmy Carter, how much worse could this be.

Sep 29, 2008 - 5:16 pm 75. kabud:

Believer:

search youtube for

Community Reinvestment Act

you ‘ll get plenty

Sep 29, 2008 - 5:30 pm 76. kabud:

it could be a liitle more then just mortgages
http://netcastdaily.com/broadcast/fsn2008-0712-2.mp3

Sep 29, 2008 - 5:32 pm 77. Ex-fetus:

Yo Blair:

First, the plan that Congress voted down (at the insistence of their constituency) DOES NOT rescue the voters, it rescues the wall street billionaires that created the problem. Seen in that light, it is a massive fraud, a con game.
Second the American people are ALREADY PROTECTED. It’s called FDIC and it protects each Americans bank account up to 100,000 $US. Very few American have more then 100,000 $US in an account. And absolutely no sympathy for those that do.
Third, this plan is a massive assault by the forces of socialism. Most Americans HATE Socialists and socialism. All an American has to do is take a trip abroad to see how badly Socialism has screwed up other nations. So, as Ohhhh……BAAMA will find out in 35 days or so ( remember, his people are the same ones that tried to steal the election from President Bush in 2000 and unless it is a complete slaughter, they will go to court again), America is not going to vote in a Socialist. Look at the Mondale or McGovern elections.

Now something needs to be done, and will be done, but the plan to throw money at it is a non-starter.
There are plenty of other plans out there that don’t require Socialism or robbery of the taxpayers.

“You will find that the State is the kind of organization which, though it does big things badly, does small things badly, too.”
John Kenneth Galbraith
US (Canadian-born) administrator & economist (1908 – 2006)

Sep 29, 2008 - 5:35 pm 78. Sharpshooter:

We also loved it when the Fed, via Fannie and Freddie, pumped over $1 TRILLION in four years time, into the housing market and OUR homes shot upward in value (so we could take second mortgages and buy new cars, take elaborate vacations…

Wall Street was just selling supposedly guaranteed securities that out priced even Treasury Bills.

Sep 29, 2008 - 5:36 pm 79. thegr8_1:

We elected this trailer park trash, it is time to throw it in the garbage. Pelosi, Reed, Dodd, Frank, Obama, Biden etc. you should be wearing striped suits not Brooks Brothers. It’s time to throw them out of office and get some leadership that represents we the people. Kudos to the Republicans and fiscally conservative Democrats for voting against the bailout. Let the bad apples fall off the tree and the good carry on.

The chickens have come to roost at you Pelosi, you can put lipstick on a pig and it is still a pig. Sound familiar Madam Speaker?

Sep 29, 2008 - 6:16 pm 80. AnAverageAmerican:

Good point about how we are not all to blame. I live in CT and despise Senator Chris Dodd, for whom I have never voted. OTOH, my Representative, for whom I have, and will, vote is the Hon. Christopher Shays who voted against the bailout.

_That_ vote exhibited some political courage in my SW CT district filled with Wall St. execs (of whom I am not one).

Sep 29, 2008 - 6:36 pm 81. Nine-of-Diamonds:

Nice article, but Richard’s preaching to the choir.

Didn’t anyone tell you? It’s never the little guy’s fault. Especially when the little guy happens to be a member of a Sacred Victim Group.

Go to Michelle Malkin and you’ll discover the dirty little secret about this housing crisis. Entire neighborhoods rented out to illegal aliens, turned into ghost towns overnight as the owners can’t pay their subprime mortgages.

If the McCain ticket (or any Republicans) called attention to the disproportionate number of minorities involved in this disaster, what do you think the result would be? “RAY-CIST! RAY-CIST!!!111!!”

We can’t have Blacks and Hispanics responsible for their own actions. No; instead we’ve got to persist in a fiction whereby the crisis either came out of nowhere or (even better) was caused by Wall Street [White] greed. All the better to browbeat guilt-stricken Whites with so they’ll pull the lever for Soros’ Affirmative Action hack come November.

Once 0bama gets his veto proof majority we are DONE. Resentful minority “activists”/freeloaders will race to loot from a shrinking tax base. We’re fast approaching the point in a Democracy/Republic where collapse begins. People realize they can vote themselves more funds “indefinitely” while letting the tax burden fall on others. The dems and RINOS are only too happy to oblige. In reality I don’t even blame 0bama. He’s just a man seizing an opportunity; it’s the public’s fault for either trusting him or for letting the 0-bots get away with pushing their nonsense.

Sep 29, 2008 - 6:38 pm 82. Allston:

What I hope is a cogent question: why are we bailing out failures?

The reason I ask is, doesn’t that de facto means that these failed and corrupt institutions will SURVIVE?! For what possible reason? They’ve failed at their primary “mission,” in such a way so as to seriously hurt our national economy. Why would we ever try to perpetuate their reign?

Now what kind of stupidity is THAT?!

Sep 29, 2008 - 6:39 pm 83. Nine-of-Diamonds:

Allston, these “failed” and “corrupt” institutions functioned exactly as planned. Recall that Obama was strong-arming banks into this subprime garbage back in the mid 90’s. Now that he’s running for office he gets a “return on his investment”, so to speak – a readymade crisis that incidentally offers a chance for massive Government involvement. Just take Botox Girl’s word for it – “too little” regulation and “Greed” caused the crisis, so the only remedy is to turn ourselves into a quasi-Socialist state.

The Leftists in my parents’ homeland and countless other third world countries were masters of this technique.

1) Generate discontent by demanding “fairness” or “justice”.
2) To achieve “fairness”, run the country’s institutions into the ground, causing chaos.
3) Misdirect the public’s anger and promise not to let the “crisis” happen again.
4) Eliminate political & economic freedom to resolve the “crisis”. But only as a temporary measure, of course. For the citizens’ own good.

Sep 29, 2008 - 7:02 pm 84. Ex-fetus:

Yo Blair;
Here is the alleged story behind the nitty gritty of the failure;

Reported tonight by FOX ostensibly what happened is that the Reps noticed that Pelosi was giving many of her minions who were involved in tight races the green light to vote against this bill due to it’s unpopularity. This included five committee chairmen. This was apparently pre arranged which is why she needed the Reps votes.

Well the Reps realized they’d been snookered and they started withdrawing there support. I mean why aid the other parties attempt to keep representatives, when they are the opposition and they could pass the bill all on their own , having 233 members and needing only 217 votes.

She almost simultaneously lost her mind and began the now famous totally political diatribe against the Reps for all the failures since water started flowing downhill. This added an octane boost to the Reps leaving and the result was a lost vote by the Democratically controlled House which was suppose to be a done deal. So Nancy blew it. .Arrogance, chutzpah, hubris, however you want to characterize it that appears to be what happened.

While FOX is slightly more reliable then CNN, you would need a micrometer to measure the difference. They get better rating because they have some really fine fems on board. Smart too. To many Lawyers, but some folks like that. So this story might be correct. It certainly sounds plausible.

Sep 29, 2008 - 7:49 pm 85. Laker:

The Government-Created Subprime Mortgage Meltdown

by Thomas J. DiLorenzo

The thousands of mortgage defaults and foreclosures in the “subprime” housing market (i.e., mortgage holders with poor credit ratings) is the direct result of thirty years of government policy that has forced banks to make bad loans to un-creditworthy borrowers. The policy in question is the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), which compels banks to make loans to low-income borrowers and in what the supporters of the Act call “communities of color” that they might not otherwise make based on purely economic criteria.

The original lobbyists for the CRA were the hardcore leftists who supported the Carter administration and were often rewarded for their support with government grants and programs like the CRA that they benefited from. These included various “neighborhood organizations,” as they like to call themselves, such as “ACORN” (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now). These organizations claim that over $1 trillion in CRA loans have been made, although no one seems to know the magnitude with much certainty. A U.S. Senate Banking Committee staffer told me about ten years ago that at least $100 billion in such loans had been made in the first twenty years of the Act.

So-called “community groups” like ACORN benefit themselves from the CRA through a process that sounds like legalized extortion. The CRA is enforced by four federal government bureaucracies: the Fed, the Comptroller of the Currency, the Office of Thrift Supervision, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The law is set up so that any bank merger, branch expansion, or new branch creation can be postponed or prohibited by any of these four bureaucracies if a CRA “protest” is issued by a “community group.” This can cost banks great sums of money, and the “community groups” understand this perfectly well. It is their leverage. They use this leverage to get the banks to give them millions of dollars as well as promising to make a certain amount of bad loans in their communities.

A man named Bruce Marks became quite notorious during the last decade for pressuring banks to earmark literally billions of dollars to his organization, the “Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America.” He once boasted to the New York Times that he had “won” loan commitments totaling $3.8 billion from Bank of America, First Union Corporation, and the Fleet Financial Group. And that is just one “community group” operating in one city – Boston.

Banks have been placed in a Catch 22 situation by the CRA: If they comply, they know they will have to suffer from more loan defaults. If they don’t comply, they face financial penalties and, worse yet, their business plans for mergers, branch expansions, etc. can be blocked by CRA protesters, which can cost a large corporation like Bank of America billions of dollars. Like most businesses, they have largely buckled under and have surrendered to their bureaucratic masters.

Consequently, banks in every community in America have been forced to hold a portfolio of bad loans, euphemistically referred to as “subprime” loans. In order to compensate themselves for the added risk of extending these loans, many lenders have increased the lending fees associated with mortgage loans. This is simply an indirect way of doing what banks always do – and what they must do to remain solvent: charging effectively higher rates of interest on riskier loans.

But this is discriminatory!, complained the “community organizations.” Thus, if one browses the ACORN web site, one can read of their boasts of having “predatory lending laws” passed in numerous states which outlaw such fees, prohibiting banks from protecting themselves from the added risk involved in making forced loans to “subprime” borrowers.

These are price control laws, and price controls always cause shortages. Normally, banks would respond to such laws by extending fewer riskier loans. But in this case the banks are forced to continue making the marginal loans by their bureaucratic masters at the Fed and the other three federal bureaucracies mentioned above. So-called predatory lending laws therefore force the banks to “eat” the losses. This is undoubtedly a contributing factor to the bankruptcy of dozens of mortgage lenders over the past year.

Then of course there is the issue of the Fed’s monetary policy having created the housing bubble, characterized by a spectacular escalation of real estate values in every American city over the past decade or so. This created a further problem for the financial institutions that are victimized by the CRA. They are forced to make a certain amount of bad loans, but because of the Fed-created explosion in housing prices, many thousands of subprime borrowers no longer qualified, by a long stretch, for conventional mortgages based on their incomes.

The only way these borrowers could qualify for their mortgage loans (even ignoring their bad credit ratings) was to take out adjustable rate mortgages, some of which had astonishingly low first-year rates in the 3 percent range, and sometimes lower. This is what has largely fueled the subprime mortgage meltdown – the inability of thousands of subprime borrowers to afford their mortgages now that their rates have adjusted upward. Thus, the combination of the Fed’s enforcement of the CRA (with the help of political pressure groups like ACORN) and its post 9/11 monetary policy in general are the reasons for the bursting real estate bubble and the “subprime” mortgage meltdown.

Don’t expect to read about this in the “mainstream media,” however, which generally views groups like ACORN as heroic champions of the poor, laws like the CRA as anti-discrimination laws, and places all of the blame for the subprime mortgage meltdown on greedy capitalists, especially mortgage brokers. Encouraged by such reporting, the odious Senator Charles Schumer of New York has promised federal legislation that will reign in these miscreants, while the Bush administration is proposing an indirect bank bailout by having the Federal Housing Administration cover many of the bad “subprime” loans. This will create what economists call a “moral hazard” by encouraging even more bad loans to be extended in the future. Every banker in America will be glad to extend loans (at high rates of interest) to the most uncreditworthy borrowers if he thinks there is no possibility of default with the FHA effectively guaranteeing the loan.

September 6, 2007

Thomas J. DiLorenzo [send him mail] professor of economics at Loyola College in Maryland and the author of The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War, (Three Rivers Press/Random House). His latest book is Lincoln Unmasked: What You’re Not Supposed To Know about Dishonest Abe (Crown Forum/Random House).

Copyright © 2007 LewRockwell.com

Sep 29, 2008 - 8:02 pm 86. Believer:

Thanks, kabud.

American Thinker’s comment section has this new link to Ed Wallis’ recommended video – an article there discusses taking that other one down:

uk.youtube.com/watch?v=NU6fuFrdCJY

Hey, Ed — You out there? Can you turn this one blue — you were right, it’s a good one!

Sep 29, 2008 - 8:07 pm 87. Yo Blair:

Ex-fetus: thanks for shedding light on this incredibly messy “bailout breakdown.”

Now the feeling in Europe, including among free-market leaning conservatives (yes, you do have anti-market conservatives in Europe, it’d take too much time to explain, but think old aristocrats etc ), is that the US is going to chuck out capitalism. There was even an article in The Guardian comparing the current crisis to the fall of communism in the 90s. Something has to be done!

Sep 29, 2008 - 8:50 pm 88. Edward A.:

Speaking of Sara Palin…anyone know where she is hiding. Could it be she is considering the advise offered by Conservative columnist Kathleen Parker wrote a scathing article in the National Review Online lamenting that she could no longer defend the first-term Alaska governor’s placement on the Republican presidential ticket.

“Palin’s recent interviews … have all revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who Is Clearly Out Of Her League,” she wrote. “No one hates saying that more than I do.”

Parker said the interviews revealed “there’s not much content there,” and she called on Palin to leave the Republican ticket.

Has anyone heard anything more about this??

Sep 29, 2008 - 9:34 pm 89. JMH:

Now the feeling in Europe, including among free-market leaning conservatives (yes, you do have anti-market conservatives in Europe, it’d take too much time to explain, but think old aristocrats etc ), is that the US is going to chuck out capitalism..

No, we’re not going to do that. We might chuck out parts of Wall Street though, since it has increasingly become a parasitical institution. Capitalism is founded on individuals reinvesting surplus production, and Wall Street was created as an aggregator for lots of small surpluses so that they could be efficiently reinvested. Brokers did just that, broker deals, and were paid for it. But to earn their pay, they had to broker more good deals than bad. A useful service.

But for the last thirty years or so, Wall Street has become more of a con-game than a service provider. People don’t make money on Wall Street by matching Joe’s savings with Ed’s great business plan, they do it by slicing, dicing, and repackaging risk. Not, mind you, reducing or mitigating risk, just repackaging it. The con-game part is that people thought if you shuffled the risk around fast enough – like a three-card Monte game – folks with money (or the regulators watching them) would lose track of the risk, letting the Wall Streeters discount the risk premium and pocket the difference. While they were getting away with it, they were in a perverse situation where the higher the original risk of any deal, the more money they could make, and they began encouraging excessive risk. Which eventually blew up.

That’s the problem at the New York end of things. The progressive socialist crap going on in D.C. is even worse.

There was even an article in The Guardian…

Ah yes, that beacon of Free Market thinking.

Sep 29, 2008 - 11:43 pm 90. Jeff:

What most people have not notice or fail to notice is that “Change” is coming in this election. But the “Change” is not only being promoted by Obama’s campaign since the beginning, the “Change” is now also in McCain himself, who has seemed to have made a 180 degrees turn in his own transformation. Here are the “Changes” of McCain —

1) McCain was previously against oil drilling in ANWR, Alaska; off the coast of Florida; off the coast of the Gulf of Mexico; and off the coast of California. Now he is for “drill baby drill”.
2) McCain was against Federal regulations of America’s largest financial institutions like Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and AIG. On May 6, 1999, he voted for the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act which led to the banking deregulation that allowed the mortgage industry to adopt predatory loan practices that offered mortgages to those with a poor or thin credit history who had unreliable or low incomes and could not pay it back later on. Take a look at the compelling details below —

http://thetruthorsomethinglikeit.blogspot.com/2008/09/mccain-voted-for-mortgage-crisis.html

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s1999-105

3) Now, after these financial institutions are collapsing, he is promoting Federal regulations to control them so that this crisis will not happen again. He now wants more Federal regulations of Wall Street altogether. Wouldn’t this be considered as socialism that most conservatives do not want? Also, please do not forget McCain’s past involvement in the Keating Five as an example that his future plans for Federal regulations of financial institutions will not work —

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keating_Five

4) McCain has said over and over that, “the fundamentals of our economy are strong” in reference to our economy. Now, he states that he was referring to the American workers as being the backbone of our economy? This reference is only made after Obama has contested his refusal to accept that our country is in a financial crisis. Maybe this is McCain’s way of defusing his stance of denial.
5) McCain has stated since the beginning of the Republican campaign that he will fight a good and honest campaign without resorting to dirty politics of using smear tactics. Now, most of the McCain’s campaign ads against Obama are smear campaigns that even The New York Times, The Washington Post, The LA Times, Newsweek, and various other major news agencies have declared as false information using very dirty politics. Most of the Obama’s campaign ads have been on the defense to all of these false accusations by the McCain’s campaign ads.
6) For more changes of McCain, please look at the link below —

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/flipflops

In this election, there are in fact two forms of changes. One form of “Change” is being promoted by a candidate who wants to transform this country for the better, while the other form of “Change” is being promoted by another candidate of his own transformation to capture the hearts of the American public. Which form of “Change” do we want as a country?

Sep 29, 2008 - 11:45 pm 91. Ex-fetus:

Yo Blair;
No chance of the USA going socialist on you.
Another thing to remember is that an American Liberal is a middle of the road conservative in Europe.
The market will crash a little here (I expect it to get to the low 9’s before there are so many good deals that people start snapping them up, Unemployment will bump up (but not nearly to European levels) and the Unions will get fried big-time. The environmentalists will take it hard also.
Congress will put forth a plan that does the job without 700 Billion in taxpayers dollars and things will be better then they were.
Rezko is about to roll over on Ohhhhh……BAMA;
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080930/ap_on_re_us/fundraiser_indicted
This will be such big news that someone in the MSM will run it. Ohhhhh……BAAMA is dirty. VERY dirty. Indictable dirty. What do you think will happen if a Federal Marshal arrests him during the next debate? How will the MSM keep that out of the news? 60 million people watching sort of screws any chance of keeping it under wraps. Then ALL the Liberal media will go ape sh1t. They will start digging on Obama like they did with Sara, only they will find something when they dig on Obama.

Sep 30, 2008 - 12:27 am 92. nobozons:

We aren’t that generous. Let congress cut spending to pay for it. No the taxpayers will hold of a bailout at least to election day.

Sep 30, 2008 - 9:15 am 93. Jeff:

What most people have not notice or fail to notice is that “Change” is coming in this election. But the “Change” is not only being promoted by Obama’s campaign since the beginning, the “Change” is now also in McCain himself, who has seemed to have made a 180 degrees turn in his own transformation. Here are the “Changes” of McCain —

1) McCain was previously against oil drilling in ANWR, Alaska; off the coast of Florida; off the coast of the Gulf of Mexico; and off the coast of California. Now he is for “drill baby drill”.
2) McCain was against Federal regulations of America’s largest financial institutions like Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and AIG. On May 6, 1999, he voted for the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act which led to the banking deregulation that allowed the mortgage industry to adopt predatory loan practices that offered mortgages to those with a poor or thin credit history who had unreliable or low incomes and could not pay it back later on. Take a look at the compelling details below —

http://thetruthorsomethinglikeit.blogspot.com/2008/09/mccain-voted-for-mortgage-crisis.html

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s1999-105

3) Now, after these financial institutions are collapsing, he is promoting Federal regulations to control them so that this crisis will not happen again. He now wants more Federal regulations of Wall Street altogether. Wouldn’t this be considered as socialism that most conservatives do not want? Also, please do not forget McCain’s past involvement in the Keating Five as an example that his future plans for Federal regulations of financial institutions will not work —

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keating_Five

4) McCain has said over and over that, “the fundamentals of our economy are strong” in reference to our economy. Now, he states that he was referring to the American workers as being the backbone of our economy? This reference is only made after Obama has contested his refusal to accept that our country is in a financial crisis. Maybe this is McCain’s way of defusing his stance of denial.
5) McCain has stated since the beginning of the Republican campaign that he will fight a good and honest campaign without resorting to dirty politics of using smear tactics. Now, most of the McCain’s campaign ads against Obama are smear campaigns that even The New York Times, The Washington Post, The LA Times, Newsweek, and various other major news agencies have declared as false information using very dirty politics. Most of the Obama’s campaign ads have been on the defense to all of these false accusations by the McCain’s campaign ads.
6) For more changes of McCain, please look at the link below —

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/flipflops

In this election, there are in fact two forms of changes. One form of “Change” is being promoted by a candidate who wants to transform this country for the better, while the other form of “Change” is being promoted by another candidate of his own transformation to capture the hearts of the American public. Which form of “Change” do we want as a country?

Sep 30, 2008 - 10:06 am 94. suzy:

Kick them ALL out – Pelosi – the worst Speaker of the House with a 9% approval rating, Reid, Dodd, Frank, Kerry, all of them need to be impeached!! Pelosi couldn’t even get this bailout passed with the democratic majority. They know this is bad for the taxpayers. Pelosi MUST GO!!!!!

Sep 30, 2008 - 10:53 am 95. Paul M Hupf:

There are many motivated by greed who pushed loans to honeowners to “take advantage of the savings in your home”. These homeowners were blinded by the rising price of homes. They borrowed in the expectation that home prices would go up indefinitely, themselves evidencing bad judgment and greed. But the man who is respponsible for all this loose money is Alan Greenspan, who made money available at one percent for much too long a time, allowing the entrepeneurs of greed to make money selling bad loans and then disguising all of this by packaging these loans into securities which, when sold, made more money available for the bad loans etc, etc.

Sep 30, 2008 - 2:03 pm 96. DavidN:

<>

I’ve been saying this for months now. Four years ago my wife and I bought a condo. We actually looked at what we could have afforded, not what we wanted, and we made compromises. If we’d done what some of these other folks did, we could have wound up in a nicer property, maybe a house, and now someone else would be on the hook for a tax increase to subsidize our mortgage. Honest people don’t get cheated, true, but they also don’t reap illicit benefits; it seems the latter are not disreputable any more.

Sep 30, 2008 - 3:17 pm 97. Marc Malone:

Jeff, you rpoints are wrong. Every danged one of them.

1) Yes, McCain changed his mind on drilling… when gas hit $4/gl. you got a problem with that?

2) The Gramm-Leach-Bliley act did not promote predatroy loans. It allowed banks to diversify their activities. Those banks that did are the ones who are doing better in this crisis. The investment houses are not covered by banking regulations. Those are the ones that are failing. Some banks are failing, but that happens every year.

3) Keating 5 – McCain and Glenn were exonerated. They were only slapped, because it was a Dem Congress. The real malefactprs were the other 3… ALL DEMS. The Dems had to cover themselves politically, so they slapped the 2 ‘Pubs, also… for nothing but political cover. McCain was innocent of wrongdoing. It did open his eyes to how corruption works….

4) McCain was right. The experts agree that the fundamentals are storng. All the indicators are there. This Financial mess can be contained, and if it’s done right, the economy won’t really suffer. If McCain’s bill in 2005 had not been blocked by the Dems, we wouldn’t have this mess.

5) Both campaigns made the same pledges about playing nice. They are. Compared to previous campaigns, this is nice! Blame goes both ways. Don’t give me this crud about Obama just defending himself.

6) Obama supporters should not get into McCain’s flip-flops. Obama does it every two days. he has no voting record of note, so he takes whatever position he wants. In the debate, when talking about Iran, he stated, “Sanctions don’t work!” ONE MINUTE LATER, He stated, “We need more sanctions!” He never gets challenged by the media on these things. He says it with authority, so sheeple believe him, but it’s all crap. Every position is either vague or all crap. You can’t point to a single one of his positions that doesn’t fit into one of these two categories… unless it’s one taken from one of his opponents.

So, Jeff, go over to the Lib sites and spread your message. They like it there. The critical thinkers here will bust your chops every time.

Sep 30, 2008 - 3:19 pm 98. obhaven:

If you Cant Make it, I suppose You CAN FAKE IT! Needing a loan? NEW CAR?? Credit Guidelines TOO DAMN TOUGH? You Are Not Alone! Let us help! Click here for more info www FAKEPAYCHECKSTUBS com Proven Effective for ANYONE Needing Credit,Car or Home refinancing!

Oct 1, 2008 - 7:52 am 99. njcommuter:

Because of our two-party system, a vote for ANY Democrat in Congress is a vote for the Democratic leadership of that house. If Dodd, Frank, Reid and Pelosi outrage you, then your only recourse is to vote YOUR local Dems out of Congress. If they lose their control of the committees their seniority won’t be so effective, and maybe, just maybe, their constituents will decide they aren’t so desirable. But in the meantime, they’ll be causing less harm.

Oct 3, 2008 - 1:53 am 100. Jeff:

What people don’t understand is why some of us are so against the current Republican ticket, but we have an obligation to fight against history of ever being repeated again. Many of us out here are not fighting for the Democratic campaign but are fighting against an ideology.

1) An ideology that completely mirrors the ideology of this past 8 years.
2) An ideology that recognizes the few while completely disregarding the masses.
3) An ideology that believes in taking military action against Iraq, an incident that is completely unrelated to 9/11, without solidifying our claims beforehand. In the present, we have found no evidence of weapons of mass destructions or a tie to Osama Bin Laden. The devastation of this war has cost us over 4,000 of our brave troops and counting, over 1/2 trillion dollars of taxpayer’s money and counting, and over 1 million Iraqi lives unrelated to the terrorists or insurgency.

Cost of the Iraq War — http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home

4) An ideology that still believes that the Iraq War is the right war on terrorism when the Afghanistan War should had been the right war on terrorism, where Osama Bin Laden actually was until he slipped into the mountains and into Pakistan’s territory now. The Iraq War also diverted our attention away from the Afghanistan War. We now have extended our resources in two separate places and have heightened our risk to our troops, our expenses, and creating another dilemma that will take quite some time to finalize. The Iraq War will not go away overnight and it is now our obligation to see it all the way through for God knows how many more years. This has also been the most unpopular war in the eyes of the world’s communities.
5) An ideology that believes that we are at our safest state since 9/11, when a recent terrorist plot was still trying to enter Great Britain’s airports with liquid explosives heading directly to us, but thankfully the plot was foiled. While in Afghanistan, the terrorists are regrouping and strengthening and we have recently suffered another high casualty to our troops yet again within this past month. We currently have the least amount of alliances in the world’s communities due to this unpopular Iraq War. True national securities are the ties that bind us to our world’s communities and the ties that bind them to us.
6) An ideology that vetted one of the most inexperience VP ticket in history, from foreign policies to national defense. If God forbids that anything happens to this President if elected and is stricken with illness, this VP will be running the country. For a more compelling look at Sarah Palin’s VP readiness, please look at these links below —

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loUHRv3ipLE

http://www.salon.com/opinion/walsh/election_2008/2008/09/30/palin_gaffes/

7) An ideology that believes in “the fundamentals of our economy are strong” while we are facing the highest mortgage foreclosure crisis, high unemployment rate, and the largest collapse of our financial infrastructures since The Great Depression of 1929.

This is an ideology that many of us in America are against. Whether this ideology is in the Republican or Democratic ticket is not the main issue but the fact is that America does not want to fall into another 4 more years of devastation. We cannot afford this anymore.

Oct 3, 2008 - 4:25 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: