Reminder

Freedom Democrats has a thank-you note up to Democrats and the media.

First, on the topic of the "Wall Street meltdown" I am completely and totally heartless and callous. I don't blame this on George W. Bush and the Republicans. I don't blame this on Bill Clinton and the 1990s. It's the entire system at fault and to lay the blame at any one individual is absurd and just political opportunism.

I am in complete agreement.

Blame game

An Investor's Business Daily editorial from Monday, September 15 lays the blame for the financial and housing sector meltdown at the Clinton Administration's doorstep. However, they stop short of laying out exactly how the market was motivated to offer high-risk products.

But it was the Clinton administration, obsessed with multiculturalism, that
dictated where mortgage lenders could lend, and originally helped create the
market for the high-risk subprime loans now infecting like a retrovirus the
balance sheets of many of Wall Street's most revered institutions.

Tough new regulations forced lenders into high-risk areas where they
had no choice but to lower lending standards to make the loans that sound
business practices had previously guarded against making. It was either that or
face stiff government penalties.

Unfortunately, the site has no comments at the bottom, so the normal user-content Q&A activity is absent.

Questions:

1) What rules made banks have no choice?
2) If they knew it was a bad decision, why did they still do it?
3) Since businesses operate on self-preservation, wouldn't it be up to the business to identify a losing prospect and not enter into that line of business, knowing how risky it could be?

To me, with no details or research, the IBD is saying that the Clinton Administration created a noose, and the market put their collective necks in it. Mixing metaphors, if we're to understand profit motive, there must have been some huge carrot on the other side of the noose.

The IBD is saying that it's the government's fault for even allowing the option in the first place, which cannot be reconciled with smart business decisions.

**UPDATE**

I didn't address the "stiff government penalties".

1) Did the banks and lenders do an assessment to decide whether high-risk loans carried a higher risk for loss than the goverment fines?

2) Did they think about not offering the products, and taking the hit from the goverment, while they were wallowing in the derivative benefits from the high-risk products?

3) Which was the harsher result: being fined by the government, or not being in existence 10 years later?

Personal financial manager

Mint.com is worth the price. Which is free.

Cindy McCain was a druggie?

It's old news, but offers insight into the dynamics of John and Cindy McCain's relationship.

The link is based on excerpts from a private journal of a guy that worked at the charity that Cindy McCain headed. It's an interesting story.

Name change.

In honor of Jeff Strabone's landmark decision, the name of this blog has changed.

Hydrogen

“Basically, we can mass produce these now,” said Kazuaki Umezu, head of Honda’s Automobile New Model Center, where the FCX Clarity is built. “We are waiting for the infrastructure to catch up.”

Must have skipped over this ground-breaking news in an article from the NYT. For the record, Umezu is referring to hydrogen powered cars.

Aware

Through a proxy, John McCain: "I am aware of the Internet."



I like the comment on Politico that notes:

It's pretty bad when the best we can say for McCain is that he is "aware" of his surroundings.

Audiences

This ability to have the presence to schedule time with these two audiences and use ideas/products of each to form progressive, intelligent policies differentiates Obama from McCain and/or the GOP.

The Naders and Kucinichs that criticize the second meeting clearly have their heads up their asses.

Confidence in the Iraqi economy

A Jim Michaels-bylined headline at USA Today notes:

Foreign firms investing in Iraq

This, I believe, is the next best thing to the international involvement of other governments helping to secure Iraq. As happened in the United States, "it's corporations, not government, that drive many big social changes."

Michaels notes this new involvement couldn't have happened if the violence level hadn't decreased. Things are, quote-unquote, changing in Iraq.

I do disagree with "the Pentagon official who is leading U.S. efforts to help Iraq rebuild its economy" who says that companies from the U.S.:

"may also be reluctant to invest in Iraq because the war has generated so much controversy at home."

Dollars are dollars. If so, other countries' populaces would be objecting to their companies helping in the effort.

Fashion Terrorists

I wasn't even aware of the "scandal" that arose over Rachael Ray's scarf in a Dunkin Donuts ad, but apparently, the company has pulled the offending spot. Conservative bloggers, such as Michelle Malkin said the scarf looked like a keffiyeh, and could be construed as a symbol of Palestinian jihad.

Noting that if product placement were all it took to bring down America, a Daily Kos frontpager wrote:

"To bring America to its knees, all Bin Laden must do is make his next video while drinking from a can of Coca Cola. The nation would erupt in chaos; Coca Cola sales would vanish into nothingness. In his next video, he could casually munch potato chips; the entire snack industry would collapse. One after another, he could film himself driving an American car; he could insert himself into a Girls Gone Wild video; he could appear next to a caveman, or a gecko, or Captain Crunch; he could enroll in DeVry University. On the day he refinanced his home at new historically low rates, the United States housing market would collapse irretrievably. One by one, he could decimate the entire economic fabric of America merely by association. Not one person in fifty would be willing to buck social trends and still buy Coca Cola if Bin Laden was seen drinking it; our consumer-based economy would be destroyed."

That's what happens sometimes when you carrying things out to their logical conclusion. You realize how illogical they are.

Be my friend...and die!

Jewish people that are not right-wing realize that when a right-wing Christian acts all friendly to their people it's not because he's being friendly in a Christian way, but it's because he wants them to die in the Rapture.

Or so a Jewish friend once told me.

Goals and consequences

"McCain wants to stay in Iraq until no more Americans are getting killed, no matter how long it takes and how many Americans get killed achieving that goal -- that is, the goal of not getting any more Americans killed. And once that goal is achieved, we'll stay."

- Hendrick Hertzberg, The New Yorker

While maybe accurate and funny, also simplistic.

Click here and look for Austin Bay's video presentation entitled: "A Rapid U.S. Military Withdrawal from Iraq". It's about 20 minutes long and definitely worth it. He starts with historical analysis and ends with seven hypothetical situations. I did not detect an agenda.

Tracy Morgan commenary on SNL

In response to Tina Fey's commentary that "bitch was the new black."

"Dude, you're an idiot."

Dr. Laura Schlessinger is the subject of a headline on MSNBC.com titled:

Dr. Laura: Women share blame for cheating men

Sitting governor decides to cross state lines (remember former ATTORNEY GENERAL) to procure a high-end prostitute, and it was originally investigated by the IRS looking into "transactions by a governor who appeared to be trying to conceal the source, destination or purpose of the movement of thousands of dollars in cash." You're a governor, and you're this stupid.

You know if one of your boys got mixed up in something like that, you'd have to sit him down and say, "Dude, you're an idiot."

Maybe it is Silda Spitzer's fault. For marrying a moron.

Vote on February 5, 2008

Vote Barack Obama for President of the United States of America.

Redstate.com is anti-free market

I received an email from Redstate.com editor Erick Erickson lamenting their need to ask for cash due to a change in blogging software. He blames the need for change on, wait for it...liberals!

"Unfortunately, there weren't really any conservative Scoop developers out there to help us."

For some reason, the fact there aren't any conservative developers of a specific platform is the fault of liberals and NOT the free-market. How does that work?