Something For Nothing

Update: Tonight’s debate at 9:00 p.m. (EST) will be webcast at the following websites:


From us a vote of NO CONFIDENCE.

There is long history of Republican deregulation mania, Republicans protecting CEOs of companies who lavished themselves with salaries and warrants and options. Republicans have long been economic hypocrites providing socialist protections and socialism with a compassionate face – for the wealthy. For the poor and the middle class the Republicans preached shark capitalism – with a smile.

Dimocrats, we can no longer bear to call them Democrats, preached fairness economics but luxuriated in various schemes which amount to a culture of corruption. Lift the rock, find the snakes.

No rock covered more snakes than the Chicago rock. The Rezko assisted mortgage, the freezing tenants, Jim Johnson, Michelle’s miraculous salary increases, are more than echoes of the Dodd and Conrad special favors from Countrywide Financial.

Special favors are Obama’s specialty. What other candidate has ever received delegates from a primary he was not even a candidate in? What other candidate has ever received delegates won by another candidate in a primary he was not even a candidate in. Special favors.

The American taxpayer is going to learn what Obama’s freezing constituents learned:

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

We know something must be done, and rapidly, about the current economic crisis. But we are voting NO CONFIDENCE in the various schemes and players. The Republicans have been historically wrong in their views about how to organize a modern society. But the Dimocratic corruption informs us that the American people are going to get shafted in whatever happens.

* * *

Back in March 2008, Hillary was lambasted by Obama and his Big Media masters. Hillary was once again seeing well ahead, and preparing for what needed to be done.

Of the three presidential candidates, Clinton’s fix is the most aggressive — the biggest bailout, if you will. That makes it the most offensive to those who believe the solution to artificially inflated housing prices is, yes, a period of declining housing prices. Instead, she says the government should get ready to start buying mortgages: “… I believe the Federal Housing Administration should also stand ready to be a temporary buyer — to purchase, restructure, and resell underwater mortgages.”

She also proposes a freeze on foreclosures and a $30-billion fund so that cities and states can start buying foreclosed and “distressed” properties for possible resale or rent (Imagine the bungling, the fraud, and the favoritism, if the city of Los Angeles — which can’t even keep track of foreclosed houses — gets a pile of federal money to start buying them).

The headline-grabber was the suggestion that the president assemble a group of economic geniuses — an “emergency working group on foreclosure.” She suggested, evidently with a straight face, that the group would be led by “nonpartisan” economic leaders like former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin. [snip]

Clinton manages to acknowledge that reckless borrowers bear some responsibility for the housing mess, but can’t bring herself to call it what it is: the inevitable unwinding of a bubble of unsustainably high prices and disastrous lending against those prices.

Back in March Hillary was sounding a warning and making strong proposals. Big Media and oaf Obama did their usual frat-house guffaws and ridicule.

Before the Ohio and Texas primaries on March 4 Obama offered his “cure”.

Economists question whether Obama’s $10-billion “foreclosure prevention fund” would cover the thousands of Americans who already have lost homes and the thousands more who are in danger.

“It’s a drop in the bucket,” Bivens said. Clinton echoed that skepticism Wednesday, saying that Obama’s plan was a “half-hearted attempt. You can’t have a real plan to stop foreclosures if all you’re helping is the banks.”

Obama was above his pay grade once again. Hillary Clinton was on the job, looking ahead. During the primaries the Democratic Party had a choice in selecting a leader.

Hillary offered solutions, Obama offered feel-good counseling.

He would create a huge program to counsel homeowners facing foreclosure, pay transaction costs for people forced to sell homes, and “partner with state governments, community organizations and loan providers” to modify mortgages. [snip]

Much of the $10 billion would probably go to agencies, government employees and other middlemen, not homeowners.

Obama doesn’t fall into the trap of proposing sweeping modification of already-issued mortgages, which would be hard to implement and send the message that contracts are basically optional.

Hillary Clinton does, and she raises the possibility of forcing it on Wall Street. She has asked lenders to voluntarily stop foreclosing on homes for three months and freeze adjustable-rate mortgages for five years. But if the banks balk, “Hillary will propose legislation to tackle the problems in the housing market head-on,” says her Web site.

Obama incense burners will say “so what, the primaries are over”. Once again, Hillary Clinton answers for us:

“What this crisis is at bottom is a total loss of trust,” Senator Hillary Clinton told Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski on the MSNBC Morning Joe show Tuesday. “People don’t believe what they are being told, Americans have no reason to believe either their government or the Wall Street banks, banks don’t believe each other, they don’t know how to value the assets that they hold or that they’ve sold, so we need to take a deep breath here. And I think that’ s what secretary Paulson was trying to do.”

“But there has to be some checks and balances. We can’t just turn over $700 billion. We need to have an ability to rewrite these mortgages, we need to begin to rein in the excesses on Wall Street and in the marketplace, and we need to do it in a way that will get our economy up and moving again.”

Words matter. Trust matters. We trust Hillary. We don’t trust Obama. McCain? We don’t trust McCain either but it is possible that the maverick will start kicking against Republican policies and philosophies that have failed. McCain should take a page from Hillary:

Citing the success of FDR’s administration in the 1930s as a model, she said America once again requires solutions that can create a framework that addresses both conservative and progressive concerns.

“We established back in the 1930s under incredibly severe economic conditions the framework for regulation that frankly made our market the envy of the world because we had regulation, but we didn’t in any way constrain the marketplace, so we had unprecedented growth for all of those decades.”

“Well, we’re in a new global economy now and we haven’t kept up with what is needed for a regulatory framework to try to make sure we rein in the excesses and the abuses.”

“Human nature being what it is, people are going to test the limits,” of any system, she indicated, which is what we have seen. “Let’s get together, recognize that we need new frameworks that keep people from abusing either the public trust or the private trust.”

There will be a debate tonight on foreign policy. However, most likely the debate will be dominated by the economic crisis.

For Americans the economic crisis is small change. For most Americans what grates is the moral bankruptcy of Obama and the Dimocrats and the philosophical bankruptcy of the Republicans.

There is a plucky blond lady called Hillary Clinton talking sense and showing us the way out of the mess we are in. FDR showed us the way out of the mess we were in and Hillary is reading from the FDR playbook. But tonight Hillary will not be in Mississippi to show the way.

Tonight Obama and McCain will debate.

McCain needs to address the issue of trust and why he can be trusted.

Obama? Obama wants our votes. But we are not giving something for nothing.