I have been working feverishly on my post for The Right Wing. I will put it up on that website tonight (Thursday night).
Check it out at http://autherightwing.wordpress.com/
In the meantime, why don’t you visit Drudge: http://drudgereport.com/
But he does have a funny voice and a tail. Okay, maybe not the tail, but he’s just as big of a joke as the purple dinosaur popular with preschoolers.
Charlie Gasparino, writing in Tuesday’s NY Post, points out that Mr. Frank, the Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, has no interest in getting to the bottom of the housing mess. Home prices grew at an unsustainable rate, eventually leading to a collapse in prices as homeowners with sketchy credit histories defaulted on their mortgages. Perhaps giving loans to people with bad credit played a role?
Perhaps the government-backed mortgage lenders, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, bear some responsibility? Maybe, by guaranteeing mortgages for unworthy homeowners, they put the collapse of the financial markets into motion.
From the NY Post:
Rep. Barney Frank & Co. are getting set for yet another hearing this week on the future of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-controlled mortgage lenders. Once again, they’re not after the truth — they’re looking to conceal it.
The House Financial Services Committee chairman and his brethren on the left want you to believe they’re making a good-faith effort to figure out what went wrong with Fannie and Freddie — what mistakes led to their failure and takeover by the government during the 2008 financial collapse, and how to fix both institutions for the future.
In fact, what they’ll deliver is more hot air from so-called “housing advocates” obscuring just how much Fannie and Freddie contributed to the housing
bubble, the 2008 financial collapse and the Great Recession.
It’s all meant to give lawmakers an excuse not to do what’s necessary and prudent — namely, kill Fannie and Freddie before they come back to do it all again.
The notion of “housing” as a God-given right had been promoted by people like Barney Frank for nearly two decades. Their vehicles to expand homeownership for all were “government-sponsored enterprises” Fannie and Freddie — which, starting in the mid 90s, began buying up and placing guarantees on mortgages taken out by people with lower incomes and lousy credit histories.
Giving low-income people access to the housing market sounds nice enough — but the reality was far different. Housing prices were bid up to levels that made repaying mortgages nearly impossible. When the bubble burst, the government “sponsored” agencies were in hock for billions — and so was their “sponsor,” the US taxpayer.
And once Fannie and Freddie stopped making loans to anyone with a hearbeat (and many people without jobs), housing prices began to deflate, taking the banking system and the rest of the economy with it.
Democrat Alan Grayson, a congressman from Florida, is known for his controversial characterizations of his opponents.
He’s even called Republicans “knuckle-dragging Neanderthals.”
The “green economy,” “green collar jobs,” and other greeny-weeny nonsense have become all the rage these days. President Obama, when talking about economic recovery, emphasized the importance of the so-called “green economy.” He said this while in Pennsylvania in early 2009:
No links. This is what you call an internet scavenger hunt. If you can find articles online that talk about the stuff listed above, you win*!
I don’t have time for a long post, so I’m starting something that I will do whenever I don’t have time to write: Short Takes.
That’s all for today. If you want more on what’s happening, turn on your damn TV. There are 4 cable channels devoted to news, plus your local channels.
And listen to “The KaibCast” on Saturday. I’m taking tonight and Friday off. More info on time and other stuff to come shortly. Keep checking back here for more info as it becomes available.
Journalist Bob Woodward, of Watergate fame, has a new book coming out next Tuesday titled Obama’s Wars.
In the book, Mr. Woodward exposes the internal struggle that the Obama administration faced to create an Afghanistan war strategy.
From the Washington Post:
Frustrated with his military commanders for consistently offering only options that required significantly more troops, Obama finally crafted his own strategy, dictating a classified six-page “terms sheet” that sought to limit U.S. involvement, Woodward reports in “Obama’s Wars,” to be released on Monday.
According to Woodward’s meeting-by-meeting, memo-by-memo account of the 2009 Afghan strategy review, the president avoided talk of victory as he described his objectives.
“This needs to be a plan about how we’re going to hand it off and get out of Afghanistan,” Obama is quoted as telling White House aides as he laid out his reasons for adding 30,000 troops in a short-term escalation. “Everything we’re doing has to be focused on how we’re going to get to the point where we can reduce our footprint. It’s in our national security interest. There cannot be any wiggle room.”
Obama rejected the military’s request for 40,000 troops as part of an expansive mission that had no foreseeable end. “I’m not doing 10 years,” he told Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton at a meeting on Oct. 26, 2009. “I’m not doing long-term nation-building. I am not spending a trillion dollars.”
During the Presidential election, Obama emphasized his desire to fight the Afghan war, because unlike Iraq in his view, it was the right war to fight. This helped Obama get the support of moderate and independent voters. By the look of it, I don’t think Obama was being forthright when he made those claims during the campaign. It seems to me that Obama could care less about the war, which is why he ignored the military brass when crafting his own strategy. As if a community organizer from Chicago knows anything about fighting a war.