posted January 05, 2012 04:04 PM            

We settled this here early in 2009!

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac kicked the props out from under the US real estate market with hundreds of thousands of sub-prime mortgage defaults...which sent the US economy into a tail-spin leading to bank bailouts the GM and Chrysler bailouts and later bankruptcies and the so called O'Bomber Porkulus Bill.

Those subprime mortgages which defaulted were made to borrowers who could not make the monthly mortgage payments. And, they were made under the direction and control of congressional demoscats who threatened banks and other mortgage lenders under provisions of the "Community Re-Investment Act"...a demoscat endeavor.

O'Bomber's hands are dirty too. O'Bomber sued Bank of America..way back when..because they wouldn't make a mortgage loan to someone he thought worthy. Not "credit worthy" mind you, just worthy of home ownership whether they could make the mortgage payments..or not.

It's been interesting to watch demoscats point fingers at everyone but themselves for the economic mess they created.

Btw, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were demoscat institutions where demoscats got their friends and former demoscat officials jobs to enrich themselves. Former demoscat officials such as Franklin Raines, Jamie Goerlick and Tim Johnson...just those 3 ripped off Fannie and Freddie for more than $150,000,000 in phony bonuses they hadn't earned. They did it with Enron like phony accounting but unlike Enron executives and others the Bush Justice sent to prison, they were never prosecuted.

In fact, Raines, Goerlick and Johnson wound up being advisors to the Barack Hussein O'Bomber campaign in 2008. Go figure!

Economic Crisis Owned by Democrats in Congress
Tuesday, 03 Jan 2012 11:58 AM
By Richard Rahn

On Dec. 28, the Financial Times announced, “China has again outshone the U.S. as the top venue for initial public offerings.”

How is it that, since 2008, a self-proclaimed communist country raises more capital and has more new firms going public than the great bastion of free-market capitalism, the United States?

Answer: Members of Congress have been killing the U.S. financial markets because of hubris, incompetence, and a lust for power and money.

On Dec. 21, 2008, a Wall Street Journal editorial correctly stated after the U.S. lost the lead in initial public offerings (IPOs) for the first time: “For all of this, we can thank Sarbanes-Oxley [accounting reform act, passed in 2002]. Cooked up in the wake of accounting scandals earlier this decade, it has essentially killed the creation of new public companies in America.”

Knowledgeable people had warned members of Congress about the likely costly and destructive consequences of the legislation, but their warnings were ignored.

Rep. Mike Oxley and Sen. Paul Sarbanes wisely retired once the downside of their handiwork became obvious, but the bill still has not been repealed.

In 2010, Congress passed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. The act was named after Sen. Christopher J. Dodd, Connecticut Democrat, who was forced to retire because of his financial conflicts of interest, and the notorious Rep. Barney Frank, Massachusetts Democrat, who has announced that he too will retire (probably because he would not be re-elected).

Frank was perhaps the biggest protector of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in Congress, but he had plenty of allies in this willful cover-up of the most costly financial scandal ever.

The reason these men are not in jail or have not been sued is because they have protection that only public officials can accord to themselves, unlike those of us in the private sector.

The official Washington line has been that it was “Wall Street” that caused the Great Recession. Thanks largely to the tireless efforts of a former general counsel of the Treasury, Peter Wallison, and his American Enterprise Institute colleague Edward Pinto, we now know “the financial crisis would not have occurred but for government housing policy implemented principally through Fannie and Freddie and the Department of Housing and Urban Development [HUD].”

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has confirmed that Wallison and Pinto correctly exposed the wrongdoing of government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs), including Fannie and Freddie. The SEC has documented $1.03 trillion in previously undisclosed subprime and alternative-documentation loans in Fannie’s and Freddie’s credit guaranty portfolios, and it goes on and on.

The bottom line of all of this is that it was members of Congress who were responsible for the financial crisis because of bills they passed and their lack of oversight of the GSEs.

Rather than admit their own complicity, Congress, the president and much of the Washington establishment blamed it on greedy bankers. They then rewarded two of their own — Dodd and Frank — who were among those most responsible for the problem and cover-up, by naming a financial “reform” bill after them.

The Dodd-Frank Act has neither prevented frauds nor instituted fairness, but it has shut down much of the ability of banks and other financial institutions to make loans.

A prime example of how worthless the new regulations are is Jon Corzine, former Democratic senator and governor of New Jersey, who was a major supporter of the new legislation.

His firm, MF Global, somehow lost $1.2 billion of its customers’ money because it apparently commingled client funds with the firm’s money. This is exactly one of the acts the Dodd-Frank Act was supposed to prevent.

Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. has stated that Corzine was the person to whom he and President Obama first turned for economic and financial advice.

But it only gets worse.

The United States is in the process of driving hundreds of billions of dollars, if not a trillion or more, of needed foreign investment that creates jobs and fuels new technologies, out of the country because of the new Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA).

The law would hit with draconian fines foreign financial institutions that might have a U.S. citizen among their clients if they fail to identify that person as such.

In an era when dual citizenships are common, it is practically impossible for any financial institution to know with absolute certainty the tax homes of all of its clients.

The fines for noncompliance are so massive that many foreign financial institutions say they will no longer invest in the United States. You might ask, What kind of idiot would put perhaps a trillion dollars or more of investment at risk for an illusionary gain of $8 billion in tax revenue?

The answer is Sen. Carl Levin, Michigan Democrat, a leader of the “let’s-increase-taxes-no-matter-what-the-cost” crowd. Levin consistently uses bogus data, ignores basic cost-benefit analysis and the rights and liberties of both non-Americans and Americans in his never-ending quest to tax and spend other people’s money.

His reward: praise and campaign funds from his left-wing friends, including those in the media who don’t care if they destroy the American economy.

Happy New Year!

posted January 05, 2012 04:11 PM            

Corruption!!!

posted January 05, 2012 04:19 PM            

And, it's not only demoscats, it's some republicans too.

posted January 05, 2012 04:30 PM            

quote:

---

get some honest, ethical representation in Congress.

---

posted January 07, 2012 01:14 PM            

as to the economic crisis i don't think you can lay it on the dems and let the republicans off. they are all to blame and if anything the previous administration sat by sucking its collective thumbs - yes, jwhop, before the dems came into congress.

posted January 07, 2012 02:41 PM            

I would like the corporations that are people to show me their voter registration cards. They cannot vote, therefore they are not a person. Our voter cards prove that we are. (according to some folk)

I read that 51 Million dollars were spent on the caucuses. These are not primaries, they are caucuses. Not too long ago 51 million elected a president. Obscene amounts of corporate money has gamed the entire system. I believe this is the most important legislation in recent times. It must be overturned.

Anyone can have a super pack. Who is to say where the money comes from? ....it could plausibly come from the *gasp* tali ban.

posted January 08, 2012 12:02 PM            

But even if Corporations did have the power to vote, it would only be 1 corporation=1 vote!

posted January 08, 2012 06:49 PM            

meanwhile a PERSON like keith olberman gets fired for contributing his own money to the candidates of his choice...

if they are entitled to the constitutional rights of people then they are liable to the constitutional punishments (prison, execution,etc) as people.

posted January 10, 2012 01:19 PM            

the OFFICER can vote, as well, but the corporation has no DIRECT vote at the polls.

posted January 11, 2012 11:15 AM            

Should labor unions be permitted to take the union dues of their members and fund political campaigns...like they did O'Bomber's...even when union members do not agree with having their union dues used...and also fund other leftist demoscats?

Should 501C corporations...supposedly...non partisan...like "Think Progress", "Center for American Progress" and other flat out leftist demoscat organizations be permitted to collect money from the US government, donations from members and outside advertising and then...make television ads attacking political opponents of their candidate...like O'Bomber or issues? Oh, and also coordinate very closely, including furnishing members of a candidates election team?

Should people like George Soros and other far left loons be permitted to spend up to $20 Million of their personal money to get a candidate elected..or unelected"?

Should people like George Soros and other wealthy leftists be permitted to launder money through the "Tides Foundation" and other money laundering operations to conceal the source of funding for leftist groups posing as non-profit/non-partisan 501C corporations...when their only reason for existing is to fund political campaigns..like O'Bomber's and other leftist demoscats?

Perhaps you can answer these questions and also answer the question..."if corporations shouldn't be permitted to donate soft money to political campaigns, then why should labor unions and so called 501C...non-partisan corporations be permitted to do so"?

Btw, Randall is right. Individuals working for corporations are liable under the law..think Enron executives, think WorldCom executives etc.

Also, corporations can be sued in civil court, have been sued in civil court lots of times, lost lawsuits and had to pay huge settlements to plaintiffs. Corporations can also be sued by the federal government and have been, resulting in huge fines and "consent decrees" restraining certain types of corporate behavior.

Odd I think that you would single out corporations and ignore all the outright fraud, outright election fraud, outright illegal operations and outright tax cheating by those groups with whom you agree...like "George Soros", "Think Progress", Center for American Progress", Tides Foundation", "ACORN" and others.

posted January 12, 2012 01:59 PM            

the blatant difference is that NO ONE says a UNION IS A PERSON. it is a GROUP of persons, who have voting voices individually. if they do not use them then they have little right to complain about what the mythical "bosses" do. same with organizations created expressly to campaign for certain issues...what a surprise when they do so!

i don't think it is right for the union heads to go against the wishes of their members...but are you sure that is what is going on?

i agree, soros is a filthy rich meddler and no better than one of the kochs in that sense, it doesn't matter to me what side a manipulator is on...but remember, soros had quite a lot to do with the dismantling of the soviet union too...

but a corporation is supposed to be a BUSINESS ENTITY. it is not a person, and its members are not even ASKED who they want its money donated to. they just help bring that money in and get paid to do so.

they also get paid to wear the suit, talk the prescribed lingo, clock in and clock out. they each have their own vote but that large donation the EOs put into politics does not represent the workers one whit.

can you not see the difference?

yes there are unions where the bosses go beyond the boundaries of what they are ELECTED to do. but they are ELECTED, not HIRED by the head honcho or HR. as far as i am concerned, you can take away the unions' right to donate unlimited sums too. but that doesn't change the fact that their is a huge difference between a privately owned corporation and a union.

posted January 13, 2012 11:26 AM            

You seem to embrace the notion that leftist organizations should be permitted to spend unlimited funds...even taxpayer funds...to elect political candidates of their choice.

But

Not corporations...which have been misidentified as supporting Republicans. O'Bomber received far more money from American corporations than McCain in 2008.

The issue of "Personhood" or "Non-personhood" is a red herring. The fact is, CEOs and other corporate executives have the perfect right to contribute to political campaigns. Oh, and corporate executives do answer to someone. We call those "someones"..."Shareholders". Shareholder who don't appreciate corporate executives donating corporate money to political campaigns which they don't like..and which also affects the bottom lines of corporate profits and therefore..their dividends.