Bah, Humbug!

Unsecured debt should not be legal. It is the true cancer within our financial system and not one elected official has the strength to talk to the American people about how their immaturity and gluttony is crippling our childrens' future. It is the greatest problem our families face, yet very little attention has been focused on it for fear of estranging a constituency.

Spread the wealth how? Look at his past. Obama in this video, addressing his work with ACORN litigation against the banks and relating to the Community Reinvestment Act and the failure of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, as they relate to the current real estate and financial crisis, states that, and I quote:

"Subprime lending started out as a good idea, helping Americans buy homes who previously could not afford to. Financial institutions created new financial instruments that could securitize these loans, slice them into finer and finer risk categories, and spread them out among investors and around the country, as well as around the world. In theory, this should have allowed mortgage lending to be less risky, and more diversified."

"The original idea was a good one, which was, lets see if we can distribute risk more broadly, and make it easier to provide loans to people who otherwise might not be able to get one."

Listen for yourself. You cannot dispute the mans on words recorded live:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr1M1T2Y314&feature=related


Obama in this second video is campaigning at a convention of Acorn and I believe two other Community Activist's organizations. Ask if he will be their ally if he becomes President, Obama says, quote:

"Yes, but let me say that before I even get inaugurated, during the transition we are going to be calling all of you in to help us shape the agenda."

See and hear it for yourself. Obama promised that Acorn and other groups like it will setting his agenda if elected:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vJcVgJhNaU
Below is a link to C-SPAN video clips of the Congressional hearings at roughly the time McCains attempt at S.190. to fix Fannie and Freddie. See for yourself who said what.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs
See also
http://www.newsweek.com/id/164732 from this web site. (oops!) stating that Freddie Mac was spending tax payer money to target Republicans in 2005 who were trying to regulate Fannie and Freddies fraud. Democrats were not targeted, as the were all in the tank with Fannie and Freddie to kill the regulations. Hear that, the article admits that Republicans were trying to regulate Freddie and Fannie, and Democrats were trying to stop it from happening as a means to facilitate the Community Reinvestment Act.

See also: http://www.newsweek.com/id/164972
Stating that Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act wasn't what caused the meltdown, and noting that "economists on both sides of the political spectrum have suggested that the act has probably made the crisis less severe than it might otherwise have been."

Some of us are solvent, pay plastic in full every month and wear out our cars, clothes and mowers. And of course have houses paid in full before we retire.

The sirens do not attract us to the shoals and rocks of debt from overused credit.

With luck all this will change when November 4 votes are tallied and others see the light.

duke

I don't know why Newsweek has such article when the whole world is worried about US depression? Are we, American, too worried about China getting better? From the negative article of Newsweek about China, I think so. You tell me!

Now I can only offered to by from a web site that sells electronics made in China: www.yeedong.com.
Guess what, it's too expensive to buy from Best Buy or other US outlets.
No, more to say. Just feel sad....

Comment: THE GREAT BUSH DEPRESSION
I follow an economist named Bob Proctor. He has called the top and bottom of every market crash since the 70s correctly.
He perfectly predicted the current meltdown and the picture he paints about what will happen next
is terrifying.He thinks it will be worse then the great depression.
The banks in the U.S. are going under one after the other. Countrywide ,Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch , Fanny and Freddy Mae ,AIG
The government took them over because they are bankrupt. Even with the goverment nationalizing hundreds of billions of dollars in debt the stock market is crashing
the credit markets are frozen and all of us may suffer beyond anything seen in generations
McCain just like Bush " doesn't understand the economy".
That not just my opinion its his own words. Not only does he not understand how to fix it but he does not understand how its been broken.
It is no surprise that he doesn't. The people that make up these securities use quantum mathematical models very few people understand.
Bush and McCain both can take the credit for this mess since they helped deregulate the laws that were protecting us.
Bush's economic advisor Phil Graham wrote the deregulation bill that allowed banks to take huge risks with all of our future.
Now, Phil Graham is the head of McCain's economic policy.He is also McCain's choice for the next secretary of the treasury.
No one in this country can afford for that to happen. The last time Bush met with his economic advisors was in March. He was the last to know somthing was wrong. Phil Graham had the guts to say that we are in a mental recession after he helped create the worst economy meltdown in our lifetime. Check out this link to the truth http://my.barackobama.com/keatingvideo
It will take the best and brightest minds in the world to get us out of this nightmare. As bad as Bush has done, McCain would be
even more destructive because things are in much worse shape. The next president will not inherit a budget surplus like Bush did but a crashing economy and a 11,600,000,000,000 (trillion) dollars deficit. Most of it Bush created and it will take decades to pay it back.
If you do what you have always done then you will get what you have always got.
When it comes to policy Bush and McCain are the same 90 percent of the time.
So why are the polls even close then ?
Mccains team just said they no longer want to talk about the economy.Instead they would like to spend time talking about obama
which means running the biggest smear campaign in history.
They think they can just tell you lies and you wont be smart enough to see through it
Let's teach him we are smarter than that
Stand up and hold them accountable
Bush isn't on the ballot this year but his policies are
Elect Obama Biden 2008






Check out this video of sarah palins interview and ask your self if she understands what she is talking about.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r36Xc0GG4iQ

People on these bogs are fond of saying that the current economic meltdown was caused by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac underwriting bad mortgages. While Fannie and Freddie obviously are guilty of writing bad mortgages, and worse, guilty of lobbying Congress to allow them to do so with impunity, their actions are just a small piece of the puzzle when it comes to determining who (or what) caused the financial crisis we face today.

In 1929 the stock market crash caused the banks to fail, because the banks were in bed with the stock market. Back then, banks owned investment houses, so when the stock market fell, the banks fell too. This triggered the Great Depression. So in 1933 the Congress wrote laws that regulated banking, making it illegal for banks to own investment companies, mortgage guaranty companies or insurance companies. The idea was to keep key industries separated by a fire wall, so that if one industry failed the whole economy would not go down in flames.

But the Republicans under Bush deregulated the banking industry. Senator Phil Gramm wrote legislation (the Gramm Rudman Act, the Gramm Leach Biley Act, etc.) that stripped away the regulations in the financial and insurance industies. He pushed them through the Republican Congress and they were signed into law by Geo. W. Bush. John McCain voted in favor. Everybody said how great it is to deregulate and create free markets.

Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns and Merrill Lynch each gave over a million dollars to Senator Gramm's re-election campaign.

The economic collapse that happened later was a direct result of the deregulation, and here's how: the banks wrote bad mortgages, then bundled the mortgages into investment vehicles that they sold all over the world, and they even got firms like AIG to insure the investments. It was all a house of cards.

If there had been no deregulation, sure we would have had a bunch of bad mortgages, and the mortgage guaranty and real estate industries would have suffered, but there would not have been a global financial meltdown, since the problem would have been contained in one sector of the economy. You can thank Geo W. Bush, Sen. Phil Gramm and Sen John McCain for the meltdown, since they were strong proponents of deregulation.

Furthermore, although Fannie and Freddie are now holding the bulk of these bad mortgages, Fannie and Freddie did not originally write most of these mortgages. They bought them after the fact, bundled by banks/investment companies. Fannie and Freddie got screwed by the Wall Street fat cats. And so did you, if you pay taxes.

What is Phil Gramm doing today? He works as a lobbyist in Washington, trying to make it legal for the Swiss bank he represents to sell Death Bonds in the United States. Nice guy, Phil Gramm. Incidentally, John McCain has said that he wants to appoint Phil Gramm as Treasury Secretary. Some people just can't learn from their mistakes.

Look and listen for yourself. Hear Obama in his own words discusses his links to both ACORN and the mortgage meltdown, and praises bundling and securitizing mortgages by banks as a means to float loans to the poor. Never mind the link commentators point of view, just listen to what Obama says in his own words. A picture is worth a thousand words. Maybe more in the case of the last half of the second link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vJcVgJhNaU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr1M1T2Y314&feature=related

See also:
http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?threadid=808692&boardsparam=Page%3d2

This is a link to C-SPAN video clips of the Congressional hearings at roughly the time McCains attempt at S.190. to fix Fannie and Freddie. See for yourself who said what.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

The link below contains a purported list of the top 25 in Congress who got contributions from the folks at Fannie and Freddie. Obama is listed third, after Dodd and Kerry, even though Obama is just a junior Senator. Obama is followed next by Clinton. Barney Frank and Nancy Pelosi are on the list as well.

http://www.investors.com/editorial/IBDArticles.asp?artsec=16&artnum=1&issue=20080918

And the link below describes how some Democrats in Congress tried to use the original version of the bailout bill to divert money eventually recovered to groups like ACORN, a group Obama has a long association with. See:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122247015469280723.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE TO BE HELD SUNDAY AT COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

The Free and Equal Elections Coalition (FREE) and the Columbia Political Union are pleased to announce that a Presidential debate will be held this coming Sunday, October 19th, 2008, on the campus of Columbia University.

ALL SIX of the Presidential candidates who appear on enough state ballots to acquire the 270 Electoral Votes needed to become President are invited. They are as follows (listed in alphabetical order by affiliation):

Constitution Party Candidate: Chuck Baldwin
Democratic Party Candidate: Barack Obama
Green Party Candidate: Cynthia McKinney
Independent Candidate: Ralph Nader
Libertarian Party Candidate: Bob Barr
Republican Party Can John McCain

The Columbia Political Union will present the debate from 8:00pm to 10:00pm in the Altschul Auditorium, located at 417 International Affairs Building. The debate will be moderated by Pacifica Radio's Amy Goodman, the host of "Democracy Now!". CSPAN will cover the debate, and live radio broadcasts are expected.

"The Columbia Political Union is committed to energizing political discourse on Columbia's campus," said Allon Brann, Columbia Political Union Publisher. "As a non-partisan organization, we work to provide students with opportunities to encounter and engage with political ideas across a wide ideological spectrum, and on a wide range of issues."

"It is with these goals in mind that we have organized this Presidential Debate: to give all candidates-- either within or outside of the political "mainstream"-- the opportunity to speak directly to students about their goals on the issues they deem critical for this country."

"We have invited all eligible candidates, and it is our sincere hope that all will participate, to ensure the substance and rigor of the dialogue which we believe is crucial at this time."

Certified letters officially inviting each candidate have been sent to the respective campaigns.

The Free and Equal Elections Coalition and the Columbia Political Union await the response from the candidates. All candidates' supporters are encouraged to contact the Presidential campaigns and urge them to attend.

The Columbia Political Union seeks to enhance involvement in the political process, domestic and international, and draw every member of the campus community into an ongoing discussion of political ideas.

FREE is a coalition of political parties, independent citizens and civic organizations formed to promote free and equal elections in the United States.

http://www.freeandequal.org/events.php?id=7

FREEDOM ISN'T FREE

The end of this article makes it seem that if you have credit available, then that is how much money you have to spend: "double-check your limit.." How grossly irresponsible. People shouldn't be maxing out their credit cards. People shouldn't be thinking their credit limits are limits to how much money they have to spend. This makes the article sound that consumers not spending on credit and spending what they can afford is a bad thing, because it will hurt retailers. Come on Newsweek Editors.

The end of this article makes it seem that if you have credit available, then that is how much money you have to spend: "double-check your limit.." How grossly irresponsible. People shouldn't be maxing out their credit cards. People shouldn't be thinking their credit limits are limits to how much money they have to spend. This makes the article sound that consumers not spending on credit and spending what they can afford is a bad thing, because it will hurt retailers. Come on Newsweek Editors.

This is a grossly irresponsible article. If you are already nearing your Mastercard limit, you shouldn't be filling out a new credit application in the first place. Moreover, if you are embarrassed because you are denied credit and you know you have maxed out your other credit cards as in this scenario, then good. You should be. This articles makes it seem that the consumer should be allowed more credit debt regardless of whether the person has maxed credit cards. People with good credit, who haven't maxed out are going to get credit. Newsweek ought to start focusing on ways people can clean up their financial mess, live below their means, save, and get knowledgeable about personal finance, and stop glamorizing debt and stop all the woe is me articles like this one.

Whether McCain won or lost is not relevant. He succeeded in the first half hour to plant the seeds of a Reagan style wipeout. Reputable historians and economists overwhelmingly agree that the taxation imposed by and the "stimulus" spending and public works programs of FDR actually deepened and prolonged the Great Depression. See e.g. http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409.aspx. It was the production demands of WWII that got the economy going again. And when the war was over, the economy promptly went into recession.

Point is, Obama's programs are tax and spend, and it does not really matter who he taxes, those taxes are going to be passed through the economy. Any first year economics student knows that taxation is a tool used to contract an economy experiencing inflation, because it reduces demand by reducing the amount of money individuals and businesses have to spend. It is contractionary, which is exactly what you do not want to do when the problem is that the economy is contracting already into recession. Like FDR, Obama's plans will only make it worse for longer.

Similarly, who "Joe the plumber" is is not the issue. The issue is what Obama's comments to him revealed. In the exchange with "Joe the plumber" we find out that Obama really is as radical as his early political acquaintances, and that he is into the failed economic policy of wealth redistribution. Obama's tax and spending plans alone would be bad enough, but add Reid and Pelosi to the mix, with the three of them controlling both houses of Congress and the executive without and effective restraint, and you have something that should be something that causes concern even among moderate Democrats. Don't think so? Watch and listen to a C-SPAN video clip of the Congressional hearings at roughly the time McCain's attempt at S.190. to fix fannie and freddie.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

Baby I'll be there to take your hand,
Baby I'll be there to share the land
That they'll be giving away, when we all live together.

So, in the exchange with "Joe the plumber" we find out that Obama really is as radical as his early political acquaintances, and is into the failed economic policy of wealth redistribution. Yahoo, back to the 70's we go! So now we know that an Obama presidency really would be as if it were Carter's lost second term after all.