Banking Problems and Obama, Some thoughts

Clearly the media has given up any attempts at presenting all the facts during this election cycle.  There are questions regarding the banking crisis you would think any honest journalist would be asking yet they aren't.  There are facts you would think they would point out in their stories but yet aren't.  And worst of all the are politicians spouting opinion, rhetoric and complete lies and yet the media is presenting it all as if it were the God's honest truth and all the details needed by the general public to know.

I already wrote about some of the leading factors the helped create the problem, you can read that story here, so I'm not going to repeat everything but one huge factor I see that has yet to be discussed by the major news is the Fair Housing Act passed under Bill Clinton back in the 1990s.  It required banks to give loans to minorities and both genders all at equal rates.  These same people that prior to the passing of this act were not qualifying for loans.  Clinton praised the banking administration for following through giving more loans to minorities and women while at the same time not reducing the number of loans to white men and families.  How could they do this?  Simple, they lowered the standards you needed to meet if you were a woman or a minority so more people qualified.  The result is more people who in the end couldn't pay back their loans.

Jump ahead 10 plus years (past even more bad laws that prevent banks from taking back the homes and attempting to recoup some of their losses) and we see banks burdened with bad loans which now the same politicians who created the situation are claiming are the fault poor administration on the part of the CEOs of these banks and a failure of the free market.

This in turn brings us to the US Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs.  This is the group of politicians who look at the banking and housing industries and for all intent and purpose should have been the first ones to see the problems arising.  Since the 2006 elections this committee has had over 60 meetings, at no point during any of these meetings did they foresee any of this?  Why aren't the media questioning them and trying to find out why?

Oh wait, the committee is chaired by none other the Democrat Christopher Dodds.    Chris also just happens to fall in at the very top slot of politicians receiving political contributions from Freddy Mac and Fanny Mae.  In fact if you look over the top 20 politicians receiving political contributions you'll see a who's who of members from this very same committee.  Christopher Dodds (D) #1, Robert Bennett (R) #4, Richard Shelby (R) #9, Jack Reed (D) #10, Tim Johnson (D) #17 and Tom Carper (D) #19.  That's 6 of the 21 members falling in within the top 20 benefits of political contributions from the same industry they are expecting to be the over sight on.  Expand to the top 50 and you'll see even more members of this committe falling in on the list.  Anyone see the problem with this?  It's like having the fox watching the hen house if you ask me.

And that brings us to the two men seeking to hold the highest office in this country, McCain and Obama.  You would think both would be greatly concerned considering in a few short months one of the two of them will inherit any of the results of the pending bailout.

Obama yesterday took the time to call McCain and suggested that they issue a joint statement. A statement?  He just wants to talk about it? McCain fired back suggesting both men suspend their campaigns and actually work to fix the problem.  McCain has actually stepped forward and is showing himself to be a man of action. Obama on the other hand is continuing to just talk about the problems and plans to continue forward without McCain with Friday's debate.  I can already see the headlines, "Empty Suit Debates Empty Chair".  And Democrats are at full speed attempting to spin the lack of action of their candidate any way they can to attempt to play it as a positive instead of the huge negative it actually is.  I would hope that the American voting public isn't so gulible that they actually buy into the arguments that talking about a problem is the right path here, vs atempting to fix the problem.

And speaking of Obama let's not forget that he falls in at the number 2 spot in receiving political contributions from this same industry.  When you consider that, the fact he has only one single term in a federal position of which he's missed over 45% of the votes, that as a state senator he voted "present" instead of taking a stance nearly 130 times and now that when push comes to shove he would rather sit in a room and talk rather then take action to attempt to lessen the problems he may eventually have to deal with should be become president I think it clearly shows why he's not ready for the job and he's not the person to solve the problems we are currently facing.  And the best defense you'll see from Democrats are futher attempts at trying to link every single candidate they are running against back to George Bush in some way shape or form.