Well hello! Glad you've dropped by. Feel free to have a good read, but you should know that
I'm no longer writing on this blog. The new blog is over here: Pursuit of Redemption.

Tag: Economy

So, that's TWO now

Posted by – 9/19/08

For the record, there are now two major issues on which McCain is proven to have been right, while Obama was wrong. Or at best, “present.”

Number One, The Surge. At this point, I think we can all agree that McCain’s push for a troop surge in Iraq was the best idea at the time. The best admission of being on the wrong side of history we can get out of Obama was during O’Reilly’s interview:

“I think that the surge has succeeded in ways that nobody anticipated,” Obama said while refusing to retract his initial opposition to the surge. “I’ve already said it’s succeeded beyond our wildest dreams.”

It’s safe to say that Obama’s wildest dreams were that it would end poorly, increasing his chances at election. The Dems derided the surge then just like they’re cheerleading the economic instability right now. Lame.

Number Two, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. I’d say this WaPo editorial pretty much sums it up.

In 2006, he pushed for stronger regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – while Mr. Obama was notably silent. “If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole,” Mr. McCain warned at the time.

Obama certainly has shown a lack of judgement in choosing his advisors, especially if he’s going to play the “I’m not part of the Washington establishment” game.

Whoops. I’m really starting to wonder about the intelligence possessed by the Obama camp. Is Obama really so naive/shortsighted/mean-spirited? Or can so much of the campaign missteps be blamed on the unending string of staffers he inevitably throws under the bus? The latter, of course, would call into question Obama’s judgement regarding advisors and staffers with whom he surrounds himself. Either way, not looking good. And regardless, his dubious connections are merely tangential to the real problem with Obama: bad, small, ineffective ideas for the country. If you’re confused or disagree, go back to the top and start over.


Posted by – 9/17/08

I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole. 

Hmm. Seems like the current presidential candidate who said this over two years ago might have the kind of far-looking perspective and judgement we’d want in our country’s leader. On the other hand, we could choose a leader who makes rousing, inspirational speeches in which he illogically blames the opposition party on the credit problems, despite what the record says. But, eeeh… who wants to bother with facts, right? He makes me feeeeel good about the country for the first time in my life!

UPDATE: Feel free to peruse this article as well, where the Bush Administration proposed oversight of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae over 5 years ago for the very purpose of avoiding the situation we now find ourselves in. And guess who opposed it? The Democrats in Congress. And why?

Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.

”These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ”The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”

Yeah, doesn’t sound like buying votes at all. There’s a reason most of these low-income people shouldn’t have been buying houses. History tells us that those are the people most likely to default and go into foreclosure. But who wants to learn from history when you’re so progressive?

[I]f by a “Liberal” they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind… then I’m proud to say I’m a “Liberal.”


Thanks for the mess, Congressional Democrats.

I think it's actually just your own fault, Ed

Posted by – 6/6/08

Larry King had an interview last night with Ed McMahon about his mortgage woes, and Ed told him it was a large combination of things, starting with the economy. Nice, I love blaming the economy. It’s this big, anonymous “thing” to which we can attribute all our problems without the nasty residue of responsibility. But I think Ed’s real problems come from the classic supply/demand. Apparently, Ed demands more from his wallet than it can supply:

Well, if you spend more money than you make, you know what happens.

Yes, Ed, I do. You end up losing all those things you couldn’t afford but bought anyway. Interview transcript.