The Unethics of Government, Lead by our President

Citezens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), a left-leaning watchdog group, has released its annual report on the most corrupt members of Congress. And, strangely enough, most of the top-ten are Democrats.



On the subject of ethics issues and government officials, And according to Liveleak.com, Obama spent $20.3M to bring Hamas "refugees" to America. Well, it was part of H.R. 1388, which passed by the way. Don’t believe me? Here is the Federal Register entry on it…

Federal Register: February 4, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 22)
DOCID: fr04fe09-106 FR Doc E9-2488
Presidential Documents
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
NOTICE: Part II
DOCID: fr04fe09-106
DOCUMENT SUMMARY:

[[Page 6115]]
Presidential Determination No. 2009-15 of January 27, 2009

Go look it up for yourself.



Obama also claims the fines for not carrying health insurance are not taxes. But, according to fact checking that’s a lie.

...the language of Democratic bills to revamp the nation's health care system doesn't quibble. Both the House bill and the Senate Finance Committee proposal clearly state that the fines would be a tax.”

It’s totally amazing to me how many times our President can lie, and not get called for it by the media. Left wing political watchdog groups I can understand skipping over it. But, the media not only downplays the all, but spends huge amounts of time attempting to marginalize anyone who tries to bring these lies to the light of day. How do I know? Check out this quote from later in the article:

Some liberals acknowledge that Obama might be vulnerable on the insurance requirement. But they say most people will understand as long as the legislation provides enough of a subsidy to make the coverage affordable. That's a central issue this week as the Senate Finance Committee starts voting on legislation.

Not only that, it goes on to quote a left wing group as saying whether it’s a tax or not is “a metaphysical question.” And, the media never even questioned that approach.



There were two other articles today that really caught my attention. The media and the President have been touting how much the economy is improving. They have been doing it a lot. So, explain today’s article about “10 Companies Approaching Bankruptcy”. It would appear with these big companies so close to bankruptcy that the economy is not as sound as our leaders would ahve us believe.

This was quickly followed by the article titled “FDIC Might Need To Borrow From Banks.” Turns out the FDIC doesn’t want to tap it’s credit line at the FED. So, they are trying to make banks foot the bill. Of course, the money would be borrowed, meaning banks would get some income off of it. And, borrowing from the big banks is just one option, but it is being seriously considered.

“Regulators also are considering levying a special emergency fee on all banks, charging regular fees early or tapping a $100 billion credit line with the U.S. Treasury, the officials said.”

Perhaps I’m just a bit naïve, but, aren’t these banks in danger of failing due to bad lending, and so forth? Especially the big banks? The same banks that are being told not to repay their TARP funds due to possible solvency issues? And, the government is now going to borrow from the same banks it bailed out?

Big Brother Is About To Grow

Go ahead and post your comments on the White House’s publicly accessible sites. Just be prepared. The government is hiring vendors to market and store your information.

The National Legal and Policy Center, or NLPC, revealed the White House New Media team is seeking to hire a technology vendor to collect data such as comments, tag lines, e-mail, audio and video from any place where the White House "maintains a presence" – for a period of up to eight years.

How much would you like to bet it won’t be just the information posted to their pages that gets examined, harvested and stored? For example, all they need to do is turn their page into an application at Facebook and it automatically shares all of your information. I’ll bet this gets billed as a means to hunt down threats to the President, but I bet all it eventually does is stifle dissent.


But, then again, that shouldn’t come as a huge surprise. Consider the President’s address to school children—just school children, by the way. Did you know the speech comes with accompanying lesson plans tailored to various grade levels? That’s the chief complaint from Republicans and other conservatives.

NBC spoke with Katie Gordon, a spokeswoman for the Florida Republican Party, who said the party's "beef" is with the accompanying lesson plans.

According to the article, people are calling those against the speech ignorant for keeping their children from being encouraged by the President. But, obviously that is not the goal. It is all about what the children are supposed to learn. That makes it an indoctrination event, using the basic definition from the dictionary (check this reference at Dictionary.com if you doubt what I say.) Maybe those accusing others of ignorance should better educate themselves on what is going in this case.

Speaking of ignorance, do you know what been going on with the money from the Stimulus package? Joe Biden gave of speech filled with praise on what the package has accomplished. But, the AP did a fact check that shows it isn’t as good as the administration would like it to appear.

(…and Obama wonders why his popularity is dropping…hmmm…)

Revealing Leftism and Healthcare Lies In the Media

For those who wonder just how leftist the media and the country are going, take a look at this CNBC discussion of the second round of AIG bonuses. Kindly notice that Leslie Marshall (from national Radio) and Tanya Acker (from the Huffington Post) are in favor of throwing legal obligations to the wind based on the income or situation of the average American. In other words, what is right by law has nothing to with what is right from a socialistic viewpoint. What that boils down to, ladies and gentlemen, is that your contract can be voided if it does not meet the social norm, or average, in terms of benefits, salary, and so forth. And, if you don’t think that’s important, look how successfully they were allowed to out-voice the more business minded speakers (leftist though they are).


On the subject of leftists taking over with media help, have you been paying attention to what it will cost for the government to get back to fiscal responsibility? According to an article at CNNMoney last week:

Under Obama's budget, Gale and Auerbach (Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center) estimate the fiscal gap would be 9% of GDP. Conceptually, that means to restore fiscal balance over the long-term the federal government would need to increase taxes by 9% of GDP or cut spending by that amount starting now and lasting "until the end of time," Gale said.

They go on to note that neither the Republican (“no new taxes”) or Democrat (“only tax the rich”) stance on taxes has any fiscal responsibility.

That article is actually about the cost of healthcare legislation. But, there are interesting points on other items, too. But, on the healthcare point:

Gale and Auerbach (Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center) estimate that for health cost savings alone to stabilize the debt-to-GDP ratio over time, the growth rate in health costs would need to be slowed by 3 percentage points a year -- for 75 years.

In other words, Obama’s healthcare savings, without major tax increases, are a fiction. Of course, this goes along with the CBO report that the healthcare legislation will actually increase the deficit by $1 trillion. Liberals were quick to change that verbiage to “increase the cost”, but the report specifically said it would increase the deficit. (…make sure you pay attention to how things are said…)

We also need to remember that all the projections on budgets are based on economic growth and output. Tax increases equal to 9% of Gross Domestic Product is based on the projected economy. For those who don’t know, 9% of GDP is A LOT! So, what if the economy continues to crater, instead of responding to the first (and expected second) stimulus?

It is, after all, a real possibility. There are many who say the market increases are not backed by real economic activity to match it. Unemployment projections during the campaign and early days of the administration said it would not reach these levels, and now Obama is projecting double-digit unemployment. And, several prominent economists are now saying no economic recovery in the second half of 2009.

Over spending got the world into this mess. And, government wants you to believe that increased borrowing will solve the problem of overspending. Congress, specifically the banking committees chaired by Democrats, allowed this mess to happen in the US. Deregulation may have played a part, but it was not the whole story.

I know this goes contrary to what the media and Liberal leaders are telling Americans. So, take some action. Hold the media accountable. Hold your Congressmen and Senators accountable. Let your voice be heard.

Obama and Government Financial Games

First, it was western banks and financial institutions. Now, Chinese banks are accused of taking excessive risks.

Chinese banks' surge in lending to support the government's stimulus package is leading to excessive risk taking, said the Fitch ratings agency.

The Fitch agency’s main point is the focus is on short term profits, instead of long term stability. Isn’t that what got the West in so much financial trouble? Perhaps the Obama administration should take a lesson on the subject of short term fixes. If the financial industry is beginning to recognize these signs, maybe the US government should, too, and stop borrowing to solve the credit crunch. If excessive credit got us into this mess, maybe someone should realize that even more credit is not likely to get us out.


Speaking of President Obama and financial solutions, people are getting pretty hacked off at him. Congress is mad. The average John Doe is mad. Why? Job losses in the auto industry, for one. Chrysler and GM are cutting jobs left and right. You might also consider the following two headlines from Reuters:

17 years for the US to exit GMAC
GM borrows more while preparing for bankruptcy

Increasing loans to companies that will fail? Taking on debt that may not be recoverable for decades? What, pray tell, is there to be excited about?

(…welcome to Liberal Obamaland…where special Liberal interests get LOTS of breaks…in the name of stamping out capitalism…)

Democrats on Taxes, Banking, and Healthcare...Nothing But Lies.

There was a very interesting discussion of ”What Is Rich”. President Obama, and most Liberal politicians, intend to raise taxes on those making $250,000 or more. Unfortunately, that is a very arbitrary standard.

An income of $250,000 is a lot richer in Abilene, Texas, than in New York's Nassau County, where it takes $430,000 to enjoy a similar quality of life, according to bankrate.com. So let's call them the "working rich."

The other flaw in this idea is that the burden of these new taxes will actually fall on the “working rich” rather than the super rich, as all the political rhetoric implied. The “working rich” are, in reality, the upper middle class. It also needs to be remembered that taxing the rich doesn’t actually stimulate the economy,

Soaking the rich doesn't even seem to increase tax revenues. The top marginal tax rate has fluctuated wildly over the past 50 years, from 91% to 28%; it's now 35%. But individual tax revenue as a percent of GDP hasn't varied much at all - it hovers at about 8% - and its variations don't correlate with the top tax rate.

So, in reality, who is really getting soaked by President Obama’s new tax plan? It’s not the rich. Obama changed nothing, despite his rhetoric.

(…is anyone really surprised?...)


Meanwhile, U.S. House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank who did such an amazing job of wathing over the financial community (aka Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) wants to eliminate the ban on internet gambling in the US. Given that Frank has never been called on the carpet by the media for his misdeeds, this will probably be trumpeted as some noble cause by the media. In an effort to look good for the party, it should be noted that Frank is also pressing legislation to halt implementation of Bush administration anti-gambling laws.

"The government should not interfere with people's liberties," said Frank.

You have to admit that as he and the other Democratic leaders in Congress press on with increase nationalization and control of business, standing up for people’s liberties is kind of reversal. The sad part is that the European gambling firms have lost millions in recent times. So, this would not even make sense from a tax revenue standpoint. But, then again, if you put in line with Obama’s failure to tax the rich, it does make a sick sort of sense.


But, in a Reuters news report, the Democrats are telling more lies. Perhaps repeating the same lie would be more accurate in this case. This time, the lie-teller is new U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. On Wednesday, she made an appearance before Congress and stated that the new US Health Agency will “compete with private insurers rather than lead to a socialized system as Republicans claim.” Her statements fly in the face of Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) Admission that Obama Healthcare Plan Will Destroy Insurance Industry. However, the report goes to great lengths to discuss to studies showing the need for urgent reform. Will the media ever get around to reporting this sort of thing properly?

(…it would be nice…but I am not holding my breath…)

The Banking Crisis, Anger and Islam

There has been a lot of media hype lately about the financial crisis. And, of course, the crisis has EVERYONE’S attention. But, what isn’t covered, or dealt with openly is the seething anger below the surface. This was best revealed on the Tonight show when President Obama was a guest.

Jay Leno described the immense dollar amounts of executive bonuses, and said

"I know what would make me feel better -- shouldn't somebody go to jail?"

At this the audience clapped and cheered loudly. In turn the President indicated that he understands the sentiment, but gave this reply:

"Here's the dirty little secret -- most of the stuff that got us into trouble was perfectly legal."

Actually, it’s not that dirty of a secret. But, it is true. It was all legal. One thing the media and government has not focused on is that most of it went on with Democrats in charge of financial oversight through the US Congress, but who said and did nothing about it. Their inaction caused a lot of this trouble. And the trouble has, in turn, generated is a lot of anger. As the audience of the Tonight show demonstrated, we are pointing fingers and demanding vengeance. And, what is being done to deal with the anger? NOTHING! ZIP! NADA!

Would you like to know why Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world? At it’s fundamental levels, it justifies anger. Most religions do the same thing, but some are more codified about it than others. You have to earn forgiveness, favor from heaven, etc. Any structured institution built by men does this.

So, why is it that we expect government to be able to solve the problem? Due to the control factors, government obviously has a vested interest in not seeing this change. People need to pay more attention to how and why government, or any other institution, gains more control over situations. And, what government does not do to solve issues…like go after the ones who did not solve the financial problems in the first place (aka Barney Frank and company).

Only one thing is required break the growth of the anger in America. It is changed hearts. So, pray for America to have a changed heart, and for people to go out living lives from changed hearts. Otherwise, the anger is only making room for more judgment and anger, which can only be justified by a religion built on it--Islam.

(...i bet you never thought there was a real connection...did you?...)

My Rant On Debt, Debt and More Debt

Debt is scourge on the American people. According to America’s Total Debt Report, 2008 debt was $186,740 per man, woman and child - - 6.4 times higher per capita than in 1957. The report also shows that higher debt reduces the level of real national income while adding little to the economy. In fact, according to the report, every dollar of economic growth requires more debt per dollar than ever before. Consider this:

Household debt is made up of consumer debt plus mortgage debt. The Family Income Report shows real median family incomes stopped growing in 1970, and thereafter families tried to keep up by going deeper and deeper into debt ever since - at near 3x the rate of national economic growth - to an all-time high today. Consumer debt payments % disposable income are at historic highs. The Family Income Report cites the reason, with dramatic pictures.

This is just to give you an idea of what lies below the surface. There is a lot more in the entire Grandfather Economic Report series. You should go read it for yourself. All of his debt information is supplied from Federal sources, by the way.

Here is the question Americans, and even those abroad, must answer. If debt got us all into this economic mess, why do we believe more debt will get us out? Everyone should know that you can only leverage your earnings so far before you produce a diminishing return due to interest requirements. According to another source, “In 1946 the debt hit 121.7% of the GDP due to WWII, it's currently (as of 2003) at 62.4%.” These figures are referring to total debt—business, household, government, etc. What does that mean in real terms for today? According to a March 3, 2009 MSN Money article:

Consumer credit ranged between 12% and 14% of the GDP from 1965 through 1995. It currently stands at 18%. With the GDP at $14 trillion, the American consumer will have to shed $600 billion of debt to achieve a 14% level. It will take years of debt reduction and GDP growth to rebalance the economy.

Put in perspective, that means almost $1 of every $5 earned is paying for debt, rather than producing anything meaningful.

So, I repeat my question. If creating so much debt, which actually reduced economic growth despite driving industrial production, got the world into this economic mess, why do the powers that be believe more debt will get us out? Simply put, debt allows more goods to be purchased, thereby maintaining economic output, if not increasing it. So, in order to keep producing goods and everyone have a job, more debt must be created. But debt actually reduces economic gain after it reaches a certain size. That’s one reason why the US dollar keeps dropping in value as we create more federal debt.

The result of the banking and financial mess was the cessation of the flow of credit. No money is reaching the market. This causes people to be unemployed, because goods are not being produced, which causes a further drop in spending, creating a further reduction in spending, and more goods left on the shelves. In order to counter that, prices would have to fall. This is something called deflation. So, the Federal government is working to cause credit to flow again, by creating more debt. The result being that the viscious cycle just continues.

The one way to guarantee the cycle stops is to cease the increase of debt. But, that would mean 10s of millions of Americans, hundreds of millions of people world wide, would suffer catastrophically. And that is political suicide for anyone in a public office. It is, or should be, morally repugnant to most people. The alternative method is to limit debt, that is place restrictions on the ability to borrow—perhaps using long abandoned security requirements (such as 20% down for mortgages). Unfortunately, that would probably have the same result, just to a lesser degree depending on how limited credit actually becomes

The simple truth is Americans cannot continue to let debt continue to get out of control. We need to stop being the selfish cretins we have become, demanding government bail us out of the messes we create. And, we need to take responsibility for our own actions. I fear, however, that we have forgotten how.

More of the Same...

Washington needs to be very cautious making deals with Afghan insurgents? Really? Do you think the Obama administration will listen?

The International Crisis Group said previous deals had broken down within months and strengthened the militants.

Instead, it said Afghans needed a stronger state and the rule of law.



In its report, the Brussels-based ICG warned that previous truce deals with militants in Afghanistan and Pakistan "enhanced the power and activities of violent insurgents, while doing nothing to build sustainable institutions".

A timely warning given that US military officials say the administration is close to announcing the strategy. The question is will the media hold Obama to the standard? Or will they continue to soft pedal the warnings and push the liberal agenda of appeasement with the enemies of peace?

(…gee…do we really need to ask?...)


Meanwhile, the NYT reports another Democrat is caught in a scandal. With her husband as a major stockholder, Maxine Walters influenced the doling out of bailout funds for OneUnited, one of the nation’s largest black-owned banks. Ms. Walters did not even disclose her relationship to Treasury officials until later. Treasury officials claim the disbursement was made on the merits. Does that change the facts of impropriety? Does it really matter if it is a minority owned bank? Apparently it does to the liberal media. Just read the article.

(…just one more case of Democrats manipulating the finicial system…but not being held accountable…what a surprise…)

10/09 Morning Report

Does anyone remember that 10 years ago, some experts were already predicting the financial crisis we are in today? A Fox News report shows that indeed they were. So why is everyone so suddenly surprised that it happened?

(…maybe the media ignored it rather than make people worry about their credit levels…that conservatives were saying needed to be paid down rather than built up…which might have caused economic decline due to less money being injected into the system through purchasing…hhhmmm…)


And, at least one journalist is saying the media itself has a share of the blame for the financial meltdown. According to Howard Kurtz’s column at the WashPo:

But while these [financial problems] were conveyed in incremental stories -- and a few whistle-blowing columns -- the business press never conveyed a real sense of alarm until institutions began to collapse.

Of course, I doubt the rest of the media will be so candid. It the same as saying Bush lied about the weapons of mass destruction, while forgetting or ignoring all the Democrats and foreign leaders who said the same thing.

(…I wonder if Kurtz gets to keep his job…hhhmmm…)


Speaking of Iraq, the media is pretty quick to only focus on the cost of the war. No one is mentioning the drop in casualties. No one is mentioning that the Bush agenda of waiting until the Iraqis were ready to govern themselves is finally going to be accomplished. No one is recognizing that several different methods attempted trying accomplish this. All the media seems to notice is that everything failed up till now. Yes, there is still violence, as evidenced by the killing of Shiite leader Saleh al-Ogayly. Evidence of the success of American efforts?

Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki vowed on Thursday to capture the assassins of an anti-American Shiite MP, the first lawmaker to be killed in 18 months, and ordered a top-level investigation.

(…wonder what kind of spin this gets in the anit-bush, anit-military, liberal American media…)

10/08 Morning Rant

Let’s see if I have all of this straight…or at least mostly. The Democrats blame 8 years of failed policy under Bush for the economic crisis in America. The Republicans blame failure of Democratic oversight groups—like the committees in Congress chaired by Democrats—for not doing anything to derail a crisis. And both Presidential candidates take credit for having tried to do something about PART of the problem. McCain did scream about abuses at Freddie and Fannie…and Democrats in Congress (including Obama) who should have been overseeing did nothing. Obama, on the other hand, saw a problem with sub-prime mortgages…and screamed about it. And, Congress (including McCain) ignored it. The warning signs were there. Different people saw different signs. But NO ONE did anything. And, now, the two of them, along with the pundits, just want to point fingers and cast blame.

The truth is there are a lot of people in government at fault. First, removing the wrong regulations was a mistake. The mistake was made by both parties, though. Deregulation was sought by Democratic Congressmen during the Regan, Clinton, and Bush administrations. So the claim that this is the culmination of 8 years of Bush policies is kind of absurd.

Second, not holding legislators accountable for their jobs was, and still is, a mistake. Barney Frank, and other leading Congressmen and Senators, refusing to deal with things at Freddie and Fannie should have Congressional hearings going on. The government in general not properly applying rules and laws that could have protected the American people should be causing massive re-election bids on both sides of the aisles.

And the media…is silent on all of this…except for blaming Bush and letting the Democrats off the hook…and sharing mundane, empty “headline stories” like this one about Sarah Palin’s family tree--which apparently includes FDR and Princess Dianna. (…haven’t actually read it…just saw the headline…)

Meanwhile, tonight after the debates, I heard pundit after pundit whine about how neither candidate had any real plan for solving the financial mess. Of course they don’t. This is so big, and hit so quickly, despite the warnings for years that it was coming, that no one has a plan to deal with this. Even the best experts only have ideas on how to deal with various parts of it. Anyone who has finished high school…even those that haven’t…knows this thing is huge, and it will take time to solve it properly.

Politicians and the media are so worried about scaring people with the reality that our “I want it now” and “give me more credit” society has brought itself to. Get a grip. The American people need to know the truth. Not platitudes. Maybe it’s been so long since someone in Washington…or wherever (including the media)…has out right told the truth no one remembers how. Maybe it’s time they started.

10/03 Morning Report

It could have been any country that started the financial crisis cascade, as an article at The Economist indicates. Unfortunately for America, it wasn’t another country. The crisis exists in America, and is affecting other countries as the waves of illiquidity spiral out. . The governments of several nations have already stepped in to bail out their banking industry.

Step forward, Peer Steinbrück, Germany’s finance minister, who rashly declared on September 25th that America was “the source…and the focus of the crisis”, before heralding the end of its role as the financial superpower. Within days, the focus shifted and Mr Steinbrück and his officials were obliged to arrange a €35 billion ($51 billion) loan from German banks and the German government to save Hypo Real Estate, the country’s second-biggest property lender.

I talked a couple days ago about how debt obligations are bought, sold, repackaged, and so on. Well, the painful truth is that debt obligations are traded on a global scale. That fact will drive the US government to do a bailout/loan package. It is a foregone reality because of the international realities involved.


Meanwhile, we have the Hot Topics of the elections. Iraq: US combat deaths down 86% from a year ago. Strange we did not hear about that in the Vice-presidential debate, considering how much they talked about Iraq. But, then again, inspite of Tom Brokaw’s statement ON CAMERA that “The Democrats are lucky there is only one Vice-presidential debate,” the NY Times claims the GOP merely survived a test. All things considered equal, I think Sen. Biden did a better job in the closing statements than Gov. Palin. But, over all, the fact that she could go step for step with him is telling of the ability of the McCain/Palin ticket. I suspect that if they can create distance between themselves and the Bush administration, the GOP just might be able to hold the Whitehouse this election.

09/30 Morning Report

Deregulation and greed go across party lines. Before we blame it all on Bush, it’s important to remember that some of the deregulation occurred during the Reagan years, with Democratic controlled Congresses. But, deregulation is not the only issue involved here. think of the debt that's caused all of this...real estate and other kinds of debt, like credit cards. I think most of us realize how spread out the debt risk of those mortgages is. But, that isn't the only debt bought and sold and repackaged in the economic system today.

Let’s start with a brief overview of the money multiplier effect. Banks are required to keep a certain percentage of every deposit at the Federal Reserve. So, assuming that to be 10%, if someone deposits $100, the bank puts $10 at the federal reserve, and loans the rest. Assume that $90 is deposited somewhere. The fed gets $9, and the rest is loaned out. And so on, and so on. In the end, you have something like $100 at the fed, and thousands of dollars of debt held by a large group of people. In other words, according to this viewpoint, our economy is based on debt creation. Most companies buy and sell debt in order to increase returns or immediate cash flow. Many times Company A will sell their receivables for a discount in order to have cash now, instead of say 3 months from now. This keeps factories going, workers employed, etc. However, without that debt, we would not have the standard of living or economic growth we have today--worldwide.

Now, let's carry the example a bit further. Let's just look at mortgages. If I buy a house (which we just did), the mortgage company is probably going to sell that loan to someone for a discounted rate in order to have cash to make another loan. The other firm probably borrowed or leveraged that deal by using some type of debt. Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, for example, bought a lot of that debt. They, and many other lenders, then repackaged it as various types of bonds and notes, selling that to use the money to buy up more mortgages and so on. Companies bought those, and used the interest to pay their own debts. When people could no longer pay those fancy mortgages developed to get more people to buy houses and put more money into the economy, things started to unwind. As you can see, following the line of reasoning behind this particular viewpoint, the dark cloud we are under suddenly looks a lot worse.

Now, back to the point about deregulation being the cause. I agree that deregulation was involved, as was human greed. But, was it the main culprit? There has always been a measure of sub-prime debt. But, banks and lenders always tried to minimize that debt amount. The amount of sub-prime lending actually took off during the Clinton years. And, that happened under the banner of stopping racially based lending (so-called "red lining")--which needed to be stopped. But, to finance the increased borrowing, or more accurately compensate for the increased risk, banks needed to find a way to get money back...and that's what lead to the increase of derivative debt instruments behind so many problems today. Now, before anyone rants about blaming Clinton, here are some sources on these claims:

The Law & Economics of Subprime Lending
Boston Globe article: Subprime Lending Misconceptions
Investors Business Daily aarticle: The Real Culprits In This Meltdown
Investor’s.com Editorial: Whose Bailout Is It?

Whether the solution is a government bailout, with payback requirements as there were for Chrysler, or not something must be done. Many people have pointed out it isn't just the Republicans and the Bush administration who did this. This is the cumulative effect of many years and administrations--from both parties. The finger pointing and politicking has to stop before America bleeds to death economically.