Originally Posted by Moe M.

While most of what the piece explains is quite true, the writer doesn't touch on the straw that broke the country's back.

In order to make the story reflect the truth about what in the end caused the crisis that we find ourselves in, the story would have to go back to the Clinton Administration and the dems in congress who invented new and broad Affirmitive Action policies that eventually forced and coerced lenders to provide loans to low income/no income people who couldn't ever pay them back.
Then passed legislation that would make Freddie/Fannie responsible for the unpaid debt, and make us, the tax payer responsible for the failures of Fannie/Freddie.

Though many have found everyone but their own to blame for the Housing/Lending collaps, the trail leads back to Clinton and the Congressional Dems that sought to buy more votes and political support from the poor and minority communities by making the American dream of home ownership available to those who weren't qualified to pay for those homes.
The plan was a failed excercise in social engineering and a grand socialist income redistribution scheme, a piramid type of scheme that by it's very construct could never have worked except in the manner that it did.
And what only can be discribed as idiotic, except when one considers what it takes to run a halfassed cover up, the very people who took part in the theft of this country's wealth and headed the programs that achived that theft, were appointed by the new administration to oversee the reconstruction of that part of the economy that they themselves ruined.

It's been said that all of the above is irrelevent, because the Bush Administration was in power and had the majority in congress for six out of the eight years leadig up to the melt down.
But what's dismissed is that the Bush administration started warning congress as far back as 2001, and every year there after, that the affirmitive action lending policy's of the last administration were doomed to fail, but that the words of Barney Frank and Chris Dodd that "The poliicies of the lending industry in regards to low income loans are working well, are in no danger of failing, and are otherwise stable" quieted the fears of congress.

At the point where it started to be apparent that that we were in real trouble the power in congress changed to the dems, and the Frank/Dodd plan was untouchable.

Did the Bush administration do it's best to head it off, No it didn't, does the Bush Administration deserve some blame for this crisis, you bet they do.

But it was the progressive liberal agenda of trying to make everybody equal economically, an impossible task, one that defies reality in a country that has it's roots in opportunity and personal advancement based on one's own hard work and aquired skills.

And that's the rest of the story.

OK Paul Harvey. That sounds plausable. I'll have to do some more research. All I've seen for quite a long time is out of control government spending on both sides of the asile. People want to blame Obama for extending a bailout that started durring the Bush administration. It seems to me if they were honest with themselves they would recognize that. Right about now I feel like the worst voter ever. I voted for spend happy Bush when I thought he was a conservative then I voted for Obama out of fear of a total collapse of the economy. It seems that whoever I choose I get the oppsite of what I wanted.

Originally Posted by Mr. Wiz

People want to blame Obama for extending a bailout that started durring the Bush administration. It seems to me if they were honest with themselves they would recognize that.

How am I being dishonest with myself for holding Obama responsible for what he chooses to sign his name to? He could just as well have chosen not to do so.

Right about now I feel like the worst voter ever. I voted for spend happy Bush when I thought he was a conservative then I voted for Obama out of fear of a total collapse of the economy. It seems that whoever I choose I get the oppsite of what I wanted.

In my opinion that is because you are not paying sufficient attention to the matter of the driver of all conscious action...ideas.

Obama's entire background, history, and actions, until he hit the campaign trail that is, show what he thinks, why, and it's basis. Even during the campaign he repeatedly alluded to 'transformation' and given his track record, associations, and statements prior to the campaign, it was crystal clear what this meant..what we are seeing now.

Bush was far from perfect, and McCain doubly so...but the basis of their ideas was fundamentally different. Even the flawed deviations from expediency centered around the basis they established over their previous records and stated ideas.

Obama is doing the same, swerving from his basis in collectivism to accomodate expediency...but his fundamental basis is in an entirely different direction, dependence on the State, top down State control of industry and personal lives, health care, and nearly every single aspect of citizens lives. Watch carefully and you see him saying he doesn't want to do these things with his mouth..and then he relentlessly, consistently, and with full intent does it anyway.

Originally Posted by Mr. Wiz

Right about now I feel like the worst voter ever. I voted for spend happy Bush when I thought he was a conservative then I voted for Obama out of fear of a total collapse of the economy. It seems that whoever I choose I get the oppsite of what I wanted.

In the first case, you voted for someone you thought would be a Conservative Republican with his fiscal policies, but like most of the rest of us "real" Conservatives, you were fooled.
The thing is, the Libs hark back and use Bush as an example of how "Republicans are big spenders", when we have learned by now that Bush was only a RINO, and didn't represent the majority of Republican's wishes in that regard.

In the second case, you bought into the lies and rhetoric without considering Obama's real political history and the things that he really stood for and how he views America.
So, you were fooled once more.

Now let's get it together and put some real Conservatives back into power so that we can try to get back to "limited government", "reasonable entitlement programs", "non-government controlled health care", and most of all, a return to the concept of personal responsibility, personal freedoms, and an environment in which all Americans, not just certain groups, have the opportunity* to succeed.

* "Opportunity", not "Guarantee". Let's get "Constitutional" again, if that's even possible.

Originally Posted by Mr. Wiz

I voted for spend happy Bush when I thought he was a conservative then I voted for Obama out of fear of a total collapse of the economy. It seems that whoever I choose I get the oppsite of what I wanted.

I voted for Bush too, but he proved he was not a real conservative. When he failed to veto even one spending bill his first term, I was disappointed, but when the dems chose Kerry to run against Bush, I didn't feel like I had any choice but to vote for Bush. So, I held my nose and pulled the lever for Bush. I listened to obama, and I didn't like what I heard at all, so again I was forced to vote for what I thought was the lesser of the two evils. I still feel that McCain would be far less dangerous than what we got. I just hope that the Republican party can get their act together, and nominate a real conservative. Things are starting to look like people are starting to wake up, and I just hope it won't be too late.

Originally Posted by Highflight

And you somehow believe that the spending by the current Democrats doesn't prove that it's the Dems who really are the big spenders?

this very thread is based on the reality that Obama's spending is insignificant when
compared to the spending that put us in the position out of which we can only
get out with MORE spending.

Yet you choose the fast train to la-la land

Originally Posted by Moe M.

In defense of democrats, I think it's the extreme left of the dem party that calles themselves progressives that is the problem, combined with that part of the republician party that has thrown it's roots and conservative values under the bus, none of them are working for us, they are our employees, and they are bossing us around.

And while they are at their growing of big government and remaking America into a socialist and dependent state, they keep us fighting among ourselves out petty disagreements and social issues.
Some day soon, we will wake up to a George Orwell existance and wonder what the hell happened to our republic and our freedoms just as we wonder today what happened to the peace of mind we had about our future just a few yeas ago, who immagined then that we would be accepting of a government agent telling GM who to hire and fire, or Chysler how many dealerships to close up, much less holding the Chair that rules Wall Street.

I'll say this, if everyday Joe Lunchbox Democrats and republicians don't wake up soon and join forces against the creeping socialist/marxist tide that is sweeping over this country, it will be too late to turn things around, and I guaranty that the yoke of government that is placed on all our shoulders will be heavy indeed.

This is so true! I hope more and more people realize this, and I think they are beginning to. The progressives know no party or side, only progressivism.

Originally Posted by RumRunner_1492

Given the record pace of spending during the first few months of this administration I think it is pretty clear who the real spenders are. There is no doubt that the democrats are the party of big govenrment and HUGE spending.

indeed. That's why I no longer wonder when I hear that to this day large percentages of
the population still believe it was Iraqis on the 9/11 planes.

the fast train to la la land is noticing that when a big deficit is bad, one many times larger is worse?

Originally Posted by peterp1964

this very thread is based on the reality that Obama's spending is insignificant when
compared to the spending that put us in the position out of which we can only
get out with MORE spending.

Yet you choose the fast train to la-la land

La-la-land is the only country where MORE spending has worked to fix the type of situation we are in!

R's need to stand pat and let the Dems holding the bag own it completely when what's inside starts to drip through, which it already is. They have no excuses, it is all their show, and empirical reality is not cognizant of their wishes that it didn't function as it does.

Money isn't just 'made up', it has well understood, clear empirical rules available to those using a proper economic school, and the dems stanky bag holding is going to get very, very ugly, and there is not one thing they can do about it now. Wishes may be nice, but reality punishes screwed up thinking relentlessly and in inexorable detail.

Bond market yield rates on long terms are showing this. Chinese talk about bonds in yuans, instead of dollars, shows it. Socialist nations warning the US about debt, shows it. Unemployment rates over the administrations projections of worst case unstimulated unemployment, shows it. The big rock is rolling, and their feet are glued firmly into the glue called direct responsibility right in front of that rock.

Originally Posted by peterp1964

this very thread is based on the reality that Obama's spending is insignificant when
compared to the spending that put us in the position out of which we can only
get out with MORE spending.

Yet you choose the fast train to la-la land

No, this thread is based on the suggestion that Obama's spending is insignificant when compared to the whole, and it's based on false assumption.

The facts are that since the great one took office the money spent and and promised to be spent by him out weighs all of the spending done by other administrations.

No matter what Bush did, Obama had the option of changing, he didn't have to spend trillians on a blackjack type bet, he could have let those business's that faltered fail, the market would have eventually righted itself, like with FDR, he will keep this depression going for ten years more than it needs to.

Nothing the government manages ever succeeds, it's failures are only covered up by fleecing more people with ever higher taxes, want proof of how government works in that direction, just take a look at european type socialism, unchecked, that's our future.

Originally Posted by Mr. Wiz

It seems that whoever I choose I get the oppsite of what I wanted.

It seems that way because it IS that way.

Politicians have learned to say to the voting public, whatever it takes to get them elected, no matter how outrageous it is. There is no reticence anymore whatsoever by any politician to lie, fabricate, take (or change) stands based on finger in the wind instant polling, and generally blow all manner of sunshine up our collective backsides, all in a balls-out effort to gain the power they so crave.

Once in power, all the promises and feel-good populist rhetoric goes right out the window, and they get to work pushing their real agenda. And we don't hold them accountable.

What's even more shameful is that we, the voting public--allow and enable them when we contine to support their acts, defend their mistakes, and even reward their conniving by reelecting them.

We're seeing it with the current president, and we saw it with the last one. There have been others, but these last two have been the worst in recent memory.

Until we ALL decide enough is finally enough, we all deserve what we keep asking for.


Rick

Originally Posted by Mr. Wiz

Right about now I feel like the worst voter ever. I voted for spend happy Bush when I thought he was a conservative then I voted for Obama out of fear of a total collapse of the economy. It seems that whoever I choose I get the opposite of what I wanted.

Hang in there Wiz, realization is healthy, confession is cleansing.

Slogans, catch-phrases, party loyalties aside

Our senses provide all the information we need to make intelligent decisions.

Remember and do not forget words and actions that frighten and enrage.

Identify and evaluate the issue.

When permitted, cast your ballot, reduce the issue.

Vote them out.

We've got some short memories here. There were runs on major banks and some went to the wall. That meant there was no liquidity to finance the everyday business of corporations. There were two basic alternatives: let the banks sink and hope it would all sort itself out in the end or prop the banks and industry up in an attempt to minimise the effects of the inevitable crisis. America, along with all the G8 countries, decided on the latter.
That was the situation on inauguration day.

Originally Posted by MtnGoat

In my opinion that is because you are not paying sufficient attention to the matter of the driver of all conscious action...ideas.

Do you vote in the primaries? I don't. I don't want to have to register for a particular party. I also don't vote for oddball candidates. I did that once (H. Ross Perot) and we ended up with Slick. I would have been happier if we had stuck with #42 for another term.

There was no way I was going to re-affirm what the Republican Party had given me the last 8 years by voting for McCain. I figured if all they had to offer was pseudo liberals then I might as well vote for the real thing. At least Obama had a plan that I thought I could understand. I haven't completely bailed on the current administration because it's too early in the game for me but I'm more than a little concerned about where we're headed with him. The concern feels a awful lot like the concern I had with Bush. I will say that I like our foreign policy shift. I never felt Bush was a good representative for the American people.