We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Put down the sick and elderly. They are just too expensive and unattractive - and they drool. It's called Ethics. Indeed, it is Scientific Ethics, entirely rational and Utilitarian. AKA evil. A similar argument could be made against the blind, the deaf, the crippled and the foolish.
Congress stunned by Bernanke warnings. What a mess those marginal mortgages created. Of course, everybody knew they would be a problem eventually - but not this big. Blame Congress for requiring banks to issue those mortgages, and blame the banks for buying too many of those rotten mortgage derivatives with their enticing yields and their phony triple-A ratings.
Do not expect neutral reporting any more. Q&O. My view: reporters now pick and choose when to be "neutral;" strangely neutral about Jihadists, highly biased about American politics.
For reporters and regular folks too: Learn all the tricks at Camp Obama. Is this creepy, or am I old-fashioned?
Could the good Baroness give us a demonstration? What a name though, Warnock...sounds right out of "Lord of the Rings" and Mount Doom. Kind of like our own home grown genocidists that occupy one wall of our Democratic Party. Who says Satan is a myth? Oh,yes, Satan herself.
I am not surprised that the Congressional leadership are stunned by this unpleasantness. When your focus is elsewhere, how could it be anything but a surprise? More to the point, we don't have leadership in our Congress. The bulk of their time is spent on self-advancement, and not what is best for the United States. Misplaced allegiance is one of the major reasons for this mess, and we should dispense with all of them. Instead of doing the "people's" work, most of them have been intent on doing the "special interest's" work.
Off topic. Saw this in comments section of a story at Pajama Media on how gays kinda like Sarah Palin. Thought it might be good for the QQQ section.
Narrowing your entire worldview through the keyhole of a sex act is usually the approach of the gay political movement that has a very extreme agenda. The fact that they have successfully shoved this agenda through different parts of government in blue states does not change the fact that what consenting adults chose to do in their bedrooms should be private, not a worldview and a lifestyle.
"Blame Congress for requiring banks to issue those mortgages, and blame the banks for buying too many of those rotten mortgage derivatives with their enticing yields and their phony triple-A ratings."
Yes. I'm far from an expert, but it seems to me that there are, indeed, at least two parts to this mess. The CRA forced banks to stop red-lining, but the problem extends well beyond that. The old fashioned banks are not going under in the current mess.
The failures are related to secondary lenders like Countrywide who backed their mortgages with securities rather deposits. The mortgage holders and the backers of those mortgages are going under. It looks to me like a toxic combination of the CRA mandate and deregulation permitting backing with securities that led to the collapse. In other words, liberal regulators and conservative deregulators alike had their stakes in this.
When we look at the actions of the failed secondary lenders, it's also clear that backing with securities enticed them to go well beyond the CRA mandate to include a percentage of poor neighborhoods and sub-prime loans in their loan portfolios. Instead, they specialized in sub-prime loans across the board and they didn't need bank deposits to back them at all. Congress did not force them to do that, but backing with securities made it possible to lend with deregulated impunity. They aggressively sought to lend at sub-prime rates to anyone who showed up at their doors--higher income, lower income--you name it. And they aggressively encouraged people with home equity to mortgage themselves to the hilt and to use their homes as collateral for other purchases.
There was a great deal of money made on those risky loans that went well beyond loaning to poor people without assets. If I was a cynical person, I might argue that the CRA was a ruse to deregulate the loan industry and entice Americans to transfer the value of real assets to investment bankers.
But I don't believe their was a conspiracy. Just lots of people acting in what they believed was in their own interests. Nor do I believe that guilty liberals, greedy investment bankers, mortgage brokers, poor people or only one branch of government is responsible. Many, many Americans of different political persuasions and circumstances played their parts, large and small.