Are you suggesting that the bailout of the banks didn't begin with Bush?
That the collapse of the housing market due to criminal behavior by Wall Street Banks didn't begin with Bush? That the financial markets were at there historical peak of greatness when Bush left office?
What kind of Kool-Aid have you drinking?
Paul began the politicalization of the topic with the statement "Pres. Obama will declare an emergency and suspend the U.S. Constitution, declaring himself "Dear Brother Leader" for life. "
Bush began shredding the constitution when he was appointed by the Supreme Court!
Clearly, you know woefully little about mortgage finance and even less about Democratic and presidential politics!
You seem to have bought into the bs story line that the Democratic Party puts out for public consumption and haven't followed the actual facts.
You are also confusing and muddling three different issues. One issue is the origins of the mortgage crisis. The second is the nature and role of bank bailouts. The third is the purposeful destruction of private home ownership.
Let us take these one at a time.
The news media has recently seized upon former Speaker Newt Gingrich's consulting contract with Freddie Mac. This has been used to create the illusion that Freddie (and by analogy and example Fannie) were somehow under the control of President Bush and the Republican Party.
Precisely the opposite was true.
Speaker Gingrich had a small contract. Have you ever looked at the Freddie Board?
Does the name Rahm Emanuel ring a bell? The current Democratic Mayor of Chicago and the former Chief of Staff to Pres. Obama?
Did you know that he was a key member of the Freddie Board during the interval when Democratic operatives first seized control of Freddie and began systematically looting that company?
Maybe you ought to read some of the newspaper articles such as this one in the Chicago Tribune:
"Rahm Emanuel's profitable stint at mortgage giant"
Or maybe you should read the FHFA "Report of the Special Examination of Freddie Mac":
With the seizure of Freddie and Fannie, key Democratic operatives began looting these two GSEs to fund various Democratic political operatives and campaigns nationally. Where do you think that Pres. Obama raised all that money?
Over at Fannie, two names that deserve special scrutiny are James A. Johnson and Franklin Raines. Are those names familiar?
Johnson was Executive Assistant to Vice President Walter Mondale throughout the Carter administration. He was the campaign manager for Mondale's Presidential campaign in 1984. Then he went to work as a Managing Director at Lehman Brothers., where he worked from 1985 to 1990.
He then used his political connections to get himself appointed as Vice Chairman of Fannie Mae in 1990. The following year, when Democrats took total control of the Fannie Board, he was named chairman and CEO of Fannie, serving in this position from 1991 to 1998.
When he departed, President Clinton had his close friend Franklin Raines installed as Johnson's successor.
Didn't you ever wonder how it came to pass that Bill and Hillary Clinton were citizens of only modest means when Bill Clinton took office, but that their net worth was shown to be in excess of $100 million when Hillary ran for President in 2008?
Did you know that James Johnson also served on the Board of Goldman?
You seem to be unaware of the known mischief at Fannie before the collapse of the housing market.
Why not read from the FHFA's reports on Fannie:
"Report of Findings to Date Special Examination of Fannie Mae"
"Report of the Special Examination of Fannie Mae"
Perhaps you were unaware of the central role played by James Johnson in getting Barack Obama elected President. Maybe you should take a look at:
High Pay at Fannie Mae For the Well-Connected
Under Johnson and Raines, in addition to the direct looting, Fannie's payrolls were padded with not only Democratic political operatives, but also their wives, girlfriends and even boyfriends or "partners":
Now let's take a quick look at banks and bailouts. Unquestionably, when the economy was reeling in 2008 from the aftermath of more than two decades of corruption and looting of the mortgage and banking industry by the Democratic Party, our then President was faced with decisions about how to react.
He might have bailed out all of the big banks. But he didn't.
Instead, two of the very most corrupt -- Bear Stearns and Lehman (yep James Johnson's former employer) -- were expressly allowed to fail.
(By contrast, Pres. Obama never met a bailout that he didn't like. In fact, he has found the economic malaise presents a perfect alibi for simply giving public money directly away to his friends under the pretext that he is "lending" money for "green energy" projects. The only thing green about these projects is the cash being looted from the public till.)
Investigations and possible prosecutions of corrupt Democrats were already well underway when the 2008 Presidential race began to heat up.
There were two major Democratic factions. There was the faction which had made its fortune looting Freddie Mac. And there was the faction that had made its fortune looting Fannie Mae. Both factions were at risk for serious prosecutions if a Republican was elected President that year. Johnson was called in to unite the factions to assure that a President was elected who would BURY these criminal investigations and assure that all of the criminals could get away with their crimes!
For this reason, the Democrats decided to go all in and elect a corrupt Chicago politician they knew that they could count on and control!
Maybe you should take a few minutes and go over the Fannie and Freddie SEC filings for the past two decades. Then take a look at the Federal Election Commission campaign finance database.
Maybe you should also take a closer look at Attorney General Eric Holder's background and connections!
Finally, we come to the issue of destruction of private ownership of housing. While most of the Democratic Party's insiders are committed only to graft and corruption and can be easily satisfied lining their own pockets, there is also a faction that is fully committed to destruction of the free enterprise system and to turning our nation into a communist state.
Ironically, while the President's handlers are mostly simply corrupt, the President is a communist idealist. Pres. Obama hates America, which is why he only began saying the Pledge of Allegiance after being elected. That is why he is committed to tearing down our nation and ending our capitalist way of life.
Those Democratic idealists who work for the President are content to working with the corrupt Democratic operatives, because it is an end to their objective, the overthrow of the United States government from within.
While the graft motivated insiders rush to loot the last few billions they think they can safely spirit away this term, the idealists see the foreclosure crisis as an opportunity to remake a lasting coalition of dependency.
They want to make sure that an absolute majority of voters is on the public dole and that a majority are tenants. This is essential to preserve class hostility and antagonism which is the key way to keep Democrats in power.
Unregistered, you may be an unlearned fool who actually has fallen for the story line that Democrats love poor people. But this is utter nonsense.
Democrats love dependency. They do not love poor people. They love to keep people poor, to create a pretext to seize power and govern! And it is really quite remarkable how they manage to so successfully demonize Republicans, who actually favor home ownership.
Maybe you need to cut down a little on whatever you have been smoking and emerge from your drug induced cloud to smell the coffee!
Facts can be quite troublesome!