Last night, February 24, 2009, President Barack Obama brought his massive spending bill, more to follow shortly, to the Congress. Our president seems like a likeable guy. Of course, he gave a flawless "speech" with humor and a serious tone. I applaud Harvard Law and all of the elitist education his grandparents provided him along the way.
In Hawaii and the northeast, our president received the same sort of education that would have been the heritage of the Kennedys and others so no surprises on his eloquence. But the spending in just ONE month. We'll see how the markets respond today. Could go either way...
And the jab that it was an economy his administration inherited? Not so... It is a housing mortgage meltdown Congress created through legislation. The bill just came due.
About the market. It's difficult for we the little people to remember that when the "big" money men and women are selling-off in a 7,350 market, they are trading in millions of shares and making millions of dollars.
Call it what you like - we are buying our way into massive government intrusion and into "progressive socialism". I'm with the governor of LA - the American PEOPLE can do anything. I want to see the Department of Education shut down and education given over to the states where it belongs. Yes, I'm a States' Rights kinda girl and I've read the US Constitution more than once, even underlined the good parts.
No need to go through the president's presentation bit-by-bit (how's that bit feeling in your mouth?) but as a point of clarification, I must point out that the slam against banks and lending agencies (mortgage companies) for handing out loans to folks who couldn't ever pay off the loan is a tad misplaced aim at the bankers and lenders and rather disingenuous as in a pure fabrication of what really caused the mortgage meltdown and slammed our economy.
Let me say, the American people can achieve anything but unlike Rush Limbaugh, it is a little more difficult when the government ties both of our hands behind our backs.
Here's what happened and where our president "re-wrote the truth." In 1977 Jimmy Carter signed the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977
. [Search here for Community Reinvestment for more posts.]
ACORN came along and so did many "carpet baggers" with law degrees tucked under their arms who were hired under federal or state grant funding to be "community organizers" - sounds so Leninist with significant help from the "teachings" of Saul Alinsky.
These lawyers cut their teeth on teaching community agitation groups how to intimidate banks and lenders in fear of lawsuits into loaning money/mortgages to people who could never pay the mortgages back. Never, ever pay them back. There was cruelty in this ploy because some of these folks - I believe - were used by the community groups and the lawyers as pawns to undermine sound business practices. The key to undermining sound business practices was through forced, federal legislation.
Then along came a few more presidents after Jimmy Carter - Clinton signed some significant changes / enhancements to the 1977 act and the banks and lenders were forced to loan money to folks who again could not repay the loans. Bush 2 pushed too and I believe I remember him saying once that more minorities now "owned" homes than ever before - including a few illegals along the way.
Home ownership is a proud time and a step upon the ladder of success in the American Dream but it is brutally cruel to loan money to a couple who do have their dreams when every indicator is that the bank or lender will eventually be forced to foreclose - take the house back, ie, toxic debt.
The president pounded on the banks and lenders last night for their bad, risky business practices when in fact many of the men and women in the House of Representatives chamber last night had voted for the very legislation that forced/strong-armed those very banks and lenders to make those risky loans and to perpetrate acts of cruelty upon Americans who simply don't need to be political pawns any longer. And if that insult is not enough, our president - as a young community organizer lawyer - used that very legislation to "threaten" or strong-arm lenders into slitting their own throats or face intimidation in court.
"Sleep with the devil (big government), take his money like a whore, and you'll become his bitches" in the famous words ascribed to Queen Elizabeth I in the Golden Age, "my bitches wear my colors." You mayors and governors out there who are no longer accountable to the people who elected you in their respective states but who are now accountable to the President for those tax dollars - my that was a little head-turning. Hmmm...
What I found interesting about last night was in the attire and demeanor of the two most powerful women in Washington, DC.
Michelle Obama, the First Lady, really looked classy in her beautiful purple dress. Great style. I would have gone for a light jacket since I'm more business than sleeveless on such occasions but our First Lady looked great. Really stunning. I was also impressed that the First Family's daughters were not there. It is a school night after all... One has to lead by example.
But the wealthiest woman or perhaps person on Capitol Hill, Speaker Nancy Pelosi wore what - a baby-puke green from what long ago era? Come on, Nancy. A little more class, especially if we are forced to see you all throughout the President's address. Eeeh gads! Maybe cream beige and pink imperial pearls with a silk navy blue business blouse. Even "Dress for Success" from its own era would have given you more style tips.
I must mention one point for Secretary of State Clinton - your hair looks much better a tad longer as it was last night but please trash the pink. It is just not a good look for you. You are much more stately than that. I suppose the women like to wear colors that make them stand out for TV in that sea of men's dark business suits but go dark business suit with skirts, not pants suits, and that will be very powerful. Much more powerful than Easter Egg pink.
Have you ever seen/watched a cat charm a bird before pouncing? Not sure but I think the mayors and governors of our several states have been put on notice - they are in the catbird seat/pan and the water surrounding them from Washington, D.C. is beginning to come to a rolling boil. They are accountable to US. Perhaps the president's threat - "Take the federal money we are forcing on you and you work for me!"
Where is Governor George Allen when we need him? I recall one time he turned down money from the Feds because of the control it would give them in Virginia. Atta boy, Governor...
God bless our men and women in uniform and God bless the American people. We cannot do much about D.C. or the market but we can watch our finances, be responsible, and read to/with our children. Buy some of Dr. Lynn Cheney's children's books on our history - that's a good place to start. We could all use a refresher course on our Constitution and our founding principles of freedom and personal responsibility.
One little word on "nationalizing" the banks. That is the first thing the Soviets, under Lenin, did when they took over Russia. The first step. What a warm and fuzzy feeling but we have been assured that Uncle Sam will NOT nationalize the banks.
I'd just like my 401K back to what it was a few months ago...but wait, the federal government may take over our 401Ks. Is that true or just rumor disguised as a "trial baloon?"