Who Is Really Responsibe For the Credit Problems?

Well, according to a video I just watched, its the Bush Administration, who else?

However, a little research into recent history will reveal the real culprits behind the so-called sub-prime mortgage fiasco. It's the race-hustling poverty pimps and the leftists who try to do social engineering by intefering with free-market capitalism.

Faced with threats of lawsuits from the Rainbow Coalition, the banks caved and started writing loans to less than credit-worthy individuals. Threats and intimidation are the hallmarks of the left; they know their ideas are stupid, and when smart people don't listen or refuse to adopt the tenets of the left, they just start screaming racism and the Anti-Christian Lawyers Union jumps up and takes the capitalists to court to get their way.

My bud in PA, Bigg Bill, analyzed the situation, and put it this way:

Here is how I have it...and it makes much more sense than this inflammatory video does, primarily because all this could not have come to happen during the short seven years of the Bush administration and in the truly booming economy we enjoyed until just the last few months. BTW, it seems to have turned the corner about two months ago, if the trend in spot copper prices is a good indicator...and it is.

The policies which lead to this problem as noted below are clearly liberal and leftist. The content of this video, while possibly partially correct, is a misrepresentation which appears to show Bush simply following established law and not the perpetrator in this problem, yet being demonized for being unsympathetic. It looks like just another liberal democrat lie. I have come to understand that it was the liberal left during the Clinton administration who found banks properly red-lining certain people and areas as uncreditworthy or as high credit risks, because that is exactly what they were. I understand that numbers of various "civil rights" groups placed an enormous amount of pressure on lending institutions to stop red-lining areas and the people in them, forcing the banks to make the types of bad loans which now have come home to roost. It IS sound lending policy in a more or less free market system to deny loans and credit or to charge higher rates to high risks. That good judgment was effectively stifled by the threat of "civil rights" lawsuits.

There is no reason for the rest of us to pay for the indiscretion, poor judgment or precarious financial condition of others. Is this discriminatory...certainly and it IS justified...and is NOT on the basis of race, which is incidental in this case.
Here again sound fiscal policy becomes confused with desired and forced social policy, just as it disingenuously does in the, "tax cuts for the rich" argument. "Marginal rate reductions for tax payers" (the people who invest and sign paychecks) is the more correct phase. Without their prosperity none of us prospers and we end up like the old USSR. Just another liberal lie, like the man-made global warming notion; without any doubt. Our recent history is rife with this BS. These lies for power are easily dispelled with a little honest research.

Our banking system has no social obligation to be a welfare agency, but a first obligation to sound lending practices and to its depositors...PERIOD! Once again, we see grand social engineers distorting a working free market system. People should not be given free and easy no down payment loans they can't afford. The banks should not be forced to do so by the race-baiting poverty pimps we see on the left. That is exactly what has happened to the best of my knowledge in this case. Once regulations are relaxed, then veryone jumps on board to remain competitive...and down the spiral goes with good intentions, but for the wrong reasons.
Screw-up and then blame it on someone else...another classic one from the liberal left! Check it out.

A little more in depth research will demonstrate the accuracy of the above. "You have no civil right that someone else has to pay for." ...we all have Constitutional Rights that no one else is required to support financially.

BB is a sharp individual. He's behind the Flight 93 fight along with Alec Rawls and a few hundred other dedicated Americans who believe the heroes of Flight 93 deserve a more appropriate memorial than the Crescent of Betrayal. Ya'll know what I think.