Story Of Obama

O's B C

 

Yep that pretty much sums up the obama plan

 

Gingrich: Obama Like a 'Teenager' Running Up Nation's Debt
By John Bachman and Patrick Hobin

Check out the video: http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/gi...g/2012/08/27/id/449969?s=al&promo_code=FE10-1

The United States has “never had a president who behaved as much like a teenager as Barack Obama” by building up debt and spending the money of future generations, Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich told Newsmax.TV in an interview at the Republican National Convention.

America, Gingrich said, will wind up paying more interest on the debt than it will for defense.

“You know, we’ve never had a president who behaved as much like a teenager as Barack Obama," said Gingrich the exclusive interview. “He’s running around with a credit card, spending our money, our children’s money and our grandchildren’s money building up a huge debt and if interest rates go up a bit at some point, we’ll end up paying more interest on the federal debt than we paid for national defense. People need to realize how a big a threat this is to our longer economic future.”

The former Republican primary candidate is hosting a series of seminars at the convention in Tampa called “Newt U,” which he said drew over 1,100 people online on Monday. About 300 people attended the Newt University program.

“I love doing this stuff,” he said. “I love solving problems and the combination of learning and teaching is a key part of solving problems . . . So it’s great for us as a party. It reminds people that we are a very broadly based, idea-oriented and solution-oriented party and I’m delighted that the Republican National Committee and the Romney campaign has been so enthusiastic in having us do it.”

Gingrich said he will speak Thursday night at the convention and will give a tribute to Ronald Reagan with his wife, Callista.

“People are going to find it a terrific reminder that Reagan and Romney facing Carter and Obama are actually in many ways very similar situations at this point and that the country made a very big choice in 1980, and we think the country will make a very big choice, again, in 2012,” he said.

Gingrich drew a sharp contrast between Reagan and Obama. Reagan, he said, “campaigned with the slogan, ‘Leadership that is working.’ He was positive about . . . America. He had a terrific record of job creation and America was back. Four years into Obama . . . he has to give us excuse after excuse.

"Somebody said that he started with, ‘Yes, we can’ and now his campaign slogan is ‘Why we couldn’t.’ That’s just pretty inadequate and tells you what a failure the Obama administration has been.”

He said he wasn’t surprised at the tone of the campaign because Obama has to stay negative to win.

“Obama cannot possibly slow down and have any hope of getting re-elected,” Gingrich said. “He has got to pile every ounce of negatives he can on Mitt Romney because if this campaign is on big issues and big choices, Obama’s going to be beaten very badly.”

When asked about the tea party’s success this year, Gingrich said the group “should feel pretty darn good this year. You look at Indiana’s results, you look at Nebraska’s results, you look at what just happened in Texas. There’s clearly a continuing, underlying momentum towards more constitutional government, less spending, lower taxes, more limiting power in Washington.”

He continued, “And, in a sense, it’s actually drawn the two parties further apart. We’ve become even more decisively the party of the Constitution and American exceptionalism. They’re becoming even more decisively a party of European Socialism and the welfare state. So, in that sense, the tea party’s had enormous effect on the whole tone . . . of American politics.”

He said although the parties are growing farther apart, compromise can still be achieved, much like Reagan was able to make happen.

“When Ronald Reagan won the decisive election in 1980, and we picked up control of the Senate by winning six seats by a total margin of 75,000 votes, in the House, where I was serving, we had a Democratic majority and Tip O’Neal was speaker,” Gingrich said.

“We had to get one out of every three Democrats to vote with us in order to pass anything in the House. But we didn’t do it by compromise; we didn’t do it by personality. We did it because President Reagan took a very powerful program, went to the American people and the American people convinced a third of the Democrats to vote with us.”

“And so, Governor Romney, if he does win this, is going to have to pick his fights carefully, make sure they’re very popular."

Gingrich said Romney’s and Ryan’s speeches will be critical, but he said Ann Romney’s could equally important.

“There are three speeches that really matter: Ann Romney, who I think will humanize Mitt, put his family in context, give you a sense of who they are; Paul Ryan, who is really coming of age as the first great, national leader of the next generation of Republicans. ”

Gingrich said, “I don’t think Romney needs to worry about being kinder and gentler. Romney needs to worry about saying to people, ‘I have the background and I have the experience to get this country fixed. We are in real trouble. This is the worst recession since the Great Depression and this is the greatest deficit pile-up in our history and Washington is clearly out of control, and if you want a strong person with a strong background who will roll up his sleeves and get the job done, then I would like to be your president.' "

He concluded: “If you want somebody to have a beer with, Barack Obama will win every time. It’s just that he’s not competent. I tell people it’s like having two plumbers you can hire. One can’t fix the plumbing but he’s really nice and the other guy can get the plumbing fixed but he’s probably not going to sit and drink a beer. Which plumber are you going to have?”

 

Romney Has Big Lead In My Poll
By Dick Morris

With all the conflicting polls and survey samples using registered — as opposed to likely — voters, I decided to conduct my own poll using the same methodologies I used so successfully for Clinton.

On Thursday, August 23rd, I conducted a national survey of 500 likely voters through live telephone interviews. The poll finds Romney ahead of Obama by 50-43! — far, far different from the published polls.

(The sample was 33% Democrat, 31% Republican, 11% black, and 8% Latino).

Apart from the head-to-head vote question, my survey tracks with the others on most of its internals.

Obama’s personal favorability is 47-50 while Romney’s is 48-48. The president’s job approval is at 46%.

Asked who would do the best job of: Improving the economy = O-39 / R-49
Creating jobs = O-38 / R-50
Strengthening Medicare = O-44 / R-42

While the Medicare issue is important, it is not the major factor. Asked which is more important, “protecting and strengthening Medicare or improving the economy and creating jobs?” The economy wins by 67-18.

Comparing Medicare plans without explaining them, voters break even with 41% favoring Obama’s and 42% backing Romney’s. Asked which scares them the most, Obama’s scared 46% and Romney’s scared 44%.

But Vice Presidential candidate Paul Ryan has scored a bull’s eye by his comparison of the two Medicare plans and the following answers indicate:

Whose plan do you agree with more? Obama who would save $716 in Medicare spending and use the money to cover the uninsured or Romney who would make the same savings but use the funds to extend the life of the Medicare trust fund?

Obama’s 38% / Romney’s 53%

And the President continues to draw big negatives over his plans to intervene in medical decision making:

President Obama’s health care law sets up a Board to issue guidelines and instructions to doctors and hospitals on what procedures, medications, or treatment to use for each illness. Do you agree or disagree with this aspect of Obama’s legislation?

Agree: 33% / Disagree: 61%

After argumentation, disagreement with Obama’s Medicare cuts becomes even sharper:

Supporters of this provision say that it will allow us to save funds in Medicare without cutting care. They say that the Board can stop unnecessary tests or overly costly treatments that do not help the patients. But opponents say that it will lead to rationing of Medicare treatment. They say that the Board would ban the most effective medicines to treat cancer, for example, because they are too expensive and might stop old people from getting hip replacements or heart bypasses. In view of these arguments, do you agree or disagree with this aspect of Obama’s legislation?

Agree: 30% / Disagree: 57%

Voters agree by 56-20 that “Romney and Ryan would not change Medicare for current beneficiaries or for people who are now over 55.” And, by 25-60, they reject the statement that “Romney and Ryan would end Medicare and leave the elderly without a good alternative.”

By 48-33, voters agree that “President Obama has not proposed any real long term fix for Medicare” although by 63-18 they agree that “In a few years, Medicare will exhaust its trust fund and will go bankrupt unless we enact changes and reforms.”

But Romney still has some selling to do. Only 38% agreed and 31% disagreed that “Romney will always allow elderly to stay in traditional Medicare. He will just offer a voucher system that will have more attractive alternatives.”

In evaluating the health care and Medicare issue, voters feel that high medical malpractice costs play a key role in driving up costs. By 63-20, they agree that “the abuse of medical malpractice law suits is a big reason medical costs are so high.” By 57-37, they support Romney’s proposals to “curb medical malpractice litigation” agreeing that it “will save billions and extend the life of Medicare.”

 

Romney's Lead Over Economy Solidifies
By DICK MORRIS

(These poll numbers are from a survey of 500 likely voters that I conducted on Thursday, August 23)

Voters have hardened their views about the economy and now decisively reject Obama's economic record and say they see no reason for it to get better in a second term. Instead, they conclude that the president doesn't know how to turn the economy around, has limited business or economic experience, and is "in over his head." Obama's attacks on Romney and his charge that the Republican would only help the rich have failed to blunt Romney's strength on the economic issue.

While voters agree, by 48-35 that "Romney would do a good job of fixing the economy and creating jobs," they reject, by 40-49, the central Obama charge against Romney that the Republican "only cares about the rich and does not look out for the average person." The 40% that agree with this statement -- the summation of Obama's negative campaign -- amount to little more than the party's base loyalists.

But, while his negatives aren't working, Obama faces daunting challenges over the economy. By 50-35 voters agree that "President Obama's economic policies have largely failed" and by 53-35, voters agree that "if Obama is re-elected, there is no reason to believe he will be more successful with the economy than he has been to date."

Indeed, voters have concluded that Obama doesn't know how to fix the economy. By 48-41, they say that he is "in over his head and doesn't know how to improve the economy."

While voters agree with Obama that taxes on the rich should be increased and that Romney won't do it (by 48-33), they believe that "taxing rich people more is just a symbolic step. The actual revenues are very small" by a margin of 47-30. In fact, by 52-29, they agree that "taxing anybody, rich or middle class, right now will hurt the economy."

Obama doesn't have much show for the months and millions he has spent attacking Romney. My polling suggests that his negatives have not scored except with the Democratic base. None of his attacks over Bain Capital, for instance, attracts agreement from more than the forty percent of the vote that is Obama's Democratic base.

Nor have Obama's attacks on Romney over Bain Capital done much better. Forty percent (the Obama base) agree that "at Bain Capital, Romney was ruthless in laying off workers, cutting their benefits, and making big profits in the process." But 48% see it differently and believe that "at Bain Capital, Romney took a large number of failing companies and turned them around creating thousands of jobs in the process. Companies like Staples and Toys R Us."

Obama gets more traction on his attacks on Romney's personal income taxes. While only 23% believe Mitt cheats on his taxes, 57% agree that while "he may not cheat, he pays very little in taxes on a huge income." And 47% agree that Romney "has offshore bank accounts to hide his money from taxes."

But these negatives seem to make little difference in how people vote since the conviction is so widespread -- well over 50% -- that Romney would be materially better at fixing the economy and creating jobs.

The Democratic theme of pounding on Romney over class warfare and tax issues is just not working and is overshadowed by voter concerns over Obama's ability to handle the economy.

 

Ann Romney: Mitt is the Man Who Can Fix America
NewsMax

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney swept to the Republican presidential nomination Tuesday night, praised lovingly by his wife from their national convention stage as the "man America needs" and cheered by delegates eager to propel him into the fall campaign against President Barack Obama.
The hall erupted in cheers when Romney strolled on stage and shared a hug and kiss with his wife of more than 40 years.

"This man will not fail. This man will not let us down," Mrs. Romney said in a prime-time speech that sounded at times like a heart-to-heart talk among women and at times like a testimonial to her husband's little-known softer side.

"It's the moms who always have to work harder, to make everything right," she said. And she vouched firmly for her husband, who lags behind Obama in surveys among women voters: "You can trust Mitt. He loves America."

Earlier, the Romneys watched on television at a hotel suite across the street from the convention hall as delegates sealed his hard-won victories in the primaries and caucuses of last winter. They ended the evening together in a VIP box just above the convention floor.

To send Romney and ticketmate Paul Ryan into the fall campaign, the convention quickly approved a conservative platform that calls for tax cuts — not government spending — to stimulate the economy at a time of sluggish growth and 8.3 percent unemployment.

Republican mockery of Obama began almost instantly from the podium at a convention postponed once and dogged still by Hurricane Isaac. The Democratic president has "never run a company. He hasn't even run a garage sale or seen the inside of a lemonade stand," declared Reince Priebus, chairman of the Republican Party.

More than eight hours in length, the session inside the Republicans' red-white-and-blue-themed convention hall passed up no opportunity to broaden Romney's appeal. Speakers included Hispanic candidates for office; former Rep. Artur Davis, a one-time Democrat and member of the Congressional Black Caucus; businessmen and women and former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, Romney's most persistent, conservative nemesis in the nominating campaign.

"Leadership matters," declared New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, keynote speaker and not coincidentally a Republican from a majority-Democratic state. "It's time to end this era of absentee leadership in the Oval Office and send real leaders to the White House."

Mrs. Romney's appearance was the highlight of the night, and it turned the proceedings into something of a his-and-hers convention.

"I read somewhere that Mitt and I have a "storybook marriage. Well, in the storybooks I read, there were never long, long, rainy winter afternoons in a house with five boys screaming at once," she said.

"A storybook marriage? No, not at all. What Mitt Romney and I have is a real marriage," she added in an appearance meant to cast her multimillionaire-businessman-turned politician in a softer, more likable light.

While there was no doubt about Romney's command over the convention, the residue of a heated campaign for the nomination was evident inside the hall.

Texas Rep. Ron Paul, who never won a primary or caucus, drew several dozen delegate votes. Earlier, his supporters chanted and booed after the convention adopted rules they opposed, but were powerless to block, to prevent those votes from being officially registered.

Opinion polls made the race a close one as the Republicans' days of pageantry and speechmaking began in earnest, and the man tapped to deliver the keynote address set the stakes.

"Conventions are always huge for a challenger, because they're the ones introducing themselves" to the voters, said New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie.

Convention planners squeezed two days of speeches and other convention business into one after scrapping Monday's scheduled opener because of fears that Isaac would make a direct hit on the Florida Gulf Coast.

That threat fizzled, but it was instantly replaced by another — that Republicans would wind up holding a political celebration at the same time the storm turned its fury on New Orleans, devastated almost exactly seven years ago by Hurricane Katrina.

Romney's convention planners said they were in frequent contact with weather forecasters, but they declined to discuss what contingency plans, if any, they had to accelerate plans for him to deliver a formal acceptance speech Thursday night.

"This is obviously the biggest speech of my life," Mrs. Romney said as she visited the custom-made podium to prepare for her remarks.

Ratification of a party platform was prelude to Romney's nomination, a document more conservative on abortion than the candidate.

On economic matters, it backs extension of the tax cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003 and due to expire at year's end, without exception. It also calls for an additional 20 percent reduction in income tax brackets that Romney favors.

In a time of 8.3 percent unemployment and the slowest economic recovery in the post-World War II era, that went to the crux of the campaign for the White House.

By contrast, Obama wants to allow existing tax cuts to expire on upper income taxpayers, and has criticized Romney's overall economic plans as a boon to millionaires that would raise taxes on the middle class.

The GOP platform also pledges that a Republican-controlled Congress will repeal, and Romney will sign, legislation to repeal the health care legislation Obama won from a Democratic-controlled Congress. So, too, for the measure passed to regulate Wall Street in the wake of the 2008 economic collapse.

On abortion, the platform says, "The unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed."

Romney opposes abortions, except in cases of rape, incest, or when "the health and life of the mother" are at stake, he said in a convention week interview.

Obama, who accepts renomination at the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, N.C., next week, campaigned in Iowa Tuesday as he set out on a tour of college campuses in battleground states in hopes of boosting voter registration among college students.

Before departing the White House, he made a point of appearing before reporters to announce the government's latest steps to help those in the way of Isaac. He signed a declaration of emergency for Mississippi and ordered federal aid to supplement state and local storm response efforts in the state.

His surrogates did their best to counter Romney and the Republicans.

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, dismissing GOP attempts to woo Hispanic voters, said, "You can't just trot out a brown face or a Spanish surname and expect people are going to vote for your party or your candidate." He added, "This is a party with a platform that calls for the self-deportation of 11 million people."

Hispanics strongly favor Obama, according to public polls, and Romney and his party have been seeking to win a bigger share of their votes by emphasizing proposals to fix the economy rather than ease their positions on immigration.

Female voters, too, prefer the president over his challenger, and Democrats have done their best to emphasize GOP opposition to abortion and even suggest the party might try and curtail access to contraceptives if it wins power.

Whatever the impact of those issues, the polls show the economy is overwhelmingly the dominant issue in the race, and on that, the voters narrowly say they trust Romney more.

In an AP-GfK poll taken Aug. 16-20, some 48 percent of registered voters said they trust Romney more on economic issues, to 44 percent for Obama.

However, a Washington Post-ABC News in the days immediately before the convention found that 61 percent of registered voters said Obama was more likable, and 27 percent said Romney.

The convention took place in an atmosphere of security that was both stringent and selective. Thousands of police from all over the country, joined by National Guard troops, Secret Service and others, stood in small groups at checkpoints, demanding those entering a secure area display proper credentials numerous times.

But former Michigan Gov. John Engler and an aide were hustled to the front of a long line waiting to clear security at one building.

Aside from Paul, Romney's long-ago rivals for the party nomination had bit roles at his convention, if that.

Michele Bachmann and Herman Cain posed for a photo after running into each other at the convention center. Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum were also in town, as well, both with speaking slots, unlike Bachmann and Cain.

 

Ann Romney: Game Changer
By DICK MORRIS

Fear, distrust, and division are so much easier to convey in a speech than love and belief. These soft emotions always seem either phony or corny when they are blared over a microphone before a rowdy live audience and skeptical viewers on television.

But Ann Romney managed to thread the needle and come over as honest, sincere, caring, unsentimental and in love. Her testament to Mitt's character, steadfastness, fortitude, compassion, empathy, and determination did not ring in the least hollow or appear at all self-serving.

But she did more. To those who wonder if Mitt Romney truly understands the problems of the average person, she spoke of their first apartment where the ironing board doubled as their dining room table. She remembered Mitt's counseling those of his faith who called him for guidance and help. She spoke of their charitable giving. She made us understand the generosity of her husband.

Many have praised Mitt's skill and drive. But these are the first words ever spoken in public in defense of his capacity for empathy and love.

Who could fail to be moved by Ann's comment that the "storybook" of her seemingly ideal marriage did not include chapters on M.S. or cancer? And we even find confidence in her blunt assertion that "this man will not fail."

Because of her speech, he probably won't.

She gave us a feeling that Romney is from this planet after all, gets wet when it rains, gets cold in the snow, and feels the same pains we all feel. She made us all realize that he is human, not by focusing on his failures but by emphasizing his empathy.

Her positive portrayal and Governor Chris Christie's interesting refusal to be harshly negative will set up an interesting contrast with the Democratic Convention to follow. The positive, uplifting tone of this Republican Convention will be a pleasant memory to counter the vituperation we may expect from Obama and Co.

Governor Christie's speech was clearly disappointing. He seems to have forgotten that he was there to praise Romney and attack Obama rather than to build himself up. This master of confrontation would have us believe that he is a virtuoso of bi-partisan co-operation and conciliation. It's a tough sell. His speech was too New Jersey, too Christie and not enough Romney or Obama.

But, the first night of the convention achieved its purposes. The parade of women and minorities to the podium was impressive (and in some contrast to their relative absence on the floor). Ann did all that was needed to explain Mitt to us and to help us trust him. It will be that much harder for Obama to run negative ads now. We will always hear Ann Romney defending her husband's heart. We may well still believe criticisms of his head. But, not of his heart. Now he's no tin man from the Wizard of Oz without a heart.

 

Perfectly Clear Choice

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/6yD43OrcjDI?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

What Really Killed the Economy: Debunking the Claims of the ‘Blame Bush’ Democrats
By Herman Cain

You’re going to hear it all week out of Charlotte. The Democrats know that the economy is horrible, and there’s no way they can plausibly claim otherwise. So they’re going to spend three days telling us – in stump speeches and in media interviews – that you can’t blame Barack Obama because he inherited the whole mess.

We know this routine all too well by now: It’s all Bush’s fault.

Except that it’s not, and it never was. One of the worst things about the mortgage market meltdown of 2008 is that so few people understood what really happened. Because it was complicated and hard to understand, people with ideological axes to grind tended to gravitate to whatever suited their preconceived point of view.

For Democrats, it was a poorly regulated Wall Street and fat cat bankers run wild. This was the easiest narrative to sell in 2008, when the public was tired of the Bush Administration and the media was only too happy to push the notion that Republicans had spent eight years letting free-market capitalism run wild at the expense of the little guy. So when Obama vowed to “crack down on Wall Street,” much of the public cheered him on.

Now that four years of Obama have not made things better, it only makes sense to ask: If his prescriptions did not solve the problem, did he correctly diagnose the problem in the first place? And the answer is no. He didn’t.

It’s also true, in fairness, that the government-caused-the-whole-thing explanation doesn’t wash either. It took a lot of cooks to make this horrible broth. But people who say banks were over-leveraged because of lax federal regulation are wrong. Banks had too much riding on toxic assets that would never have existed in the first place if government was not pushing so hard to make homeowners out of people who should not have been.

This was a bipartisan priority. The Clinton Administration passed the Community Reinvestment Act to make it easier for people with poor credit to qualify for mortgage loans. The Bush Administration – if you want to blame Bush for something – pushed hard on the idea that home ownership would turn directionless people into responsible citizens.

This helped lead to a boom in the housing market. Demand soared. Prices skyrocketed. And that caused a flood of capital into the market, as lenders searched high and low for buyers to lend money to. Why were they so eager to lend to anyone and everyone? Because the federal government eliminated much of the risk through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which would buy up bundled mortgages as soon as the ink was dry on the closing papers.

Simply put, the more you could lend, the more quick money you could make – and that gave rise to the subprime mortgage industry, which would approve people with terrible credit and no money for a down payment. The interest rates on these loans were obscene, but it wasn’t hard to get people without good credit history to make a bad decision and sign off on the mortgages. To them, it was like Christmas. They’d never been able to qualify for anything before, and suddenly they had a house.

It got worse. As the assessed value of homes soared, lenders offered home equity loans against the theoretical value of people’s homes. Someone who bought a house in 1999 for $150,000 using a traditional mortgage was getting a phone call in 2005 from Super Slick Loans and being told their house was now worth $200,000 – and oh by the way, would they like a $50,000 home equity loan? So lots of people took on more debt, all against the theoretical value of their homes. Once the housing market tanked, and their home values returned to their real, pre-bubble value, they were stuck with the debt and underwater on their mortgages.

With all these bad loans on the books, the financial system neared a breaking point and was on the verge of collapse when the Bush Administration stepped in with $700 billion in the form of the Trouble Asset Relief Program to shore up the system. Everyone hated it, but Bush had to choose between the bailout and letting the nation’s financial system collapse.

And yet, even with TARP, massive damage was unavoidable and the nation’s economy went into a nosedive, with negative growth of more than 6 percent in the fourth quarter of 2008. It was a complete economic disaster.

Many dumb practices and policies led to this, but few were as egregious as the role of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The Bush Administration saw this coming in 2003 and pushed to reform Fannie’s and Freddie’s practices, but they were stymied in Congress – primarily by Democrats Christopher Dodd in the Senate and Barney Frank in the House, who both insisted there was nothing wrong with what Fannie and Freddie were doing.

Did deregulation of financial institutions cause this? No. The idea that Republicans under Bush deregulated like mad is pure fiction. I wish it were the truth! We would all have been a lot better off. The mortgage market collapsed because it was built on a house of cards to begin with, and that house of cards exploited a lot of poor people by encouraging them to take on debt they were not prepared to handle. A lot of them spent thousands on mortgage payments only to lose their homes in the end because they could not afford their obligations. They ended up with no equity whatsoever. These folks would have been better off living in apartments and paying rent that fit within their budgets.

Perhaps the cruelest irony of all is that the federal government responded to this with an act that tightened the screws on banks – introducing all kinds of new requirements and regulations that did nothing to make things better. And what was this new act called? Dodd-Frank. That’s right. The two Democrats who prevented the reform of Fannie and Freddie back in 2003 got to write the big new law that has predictably made things worse, and even got to put their names on it.

Welcome to Washington.

Unsurprisingly, the Obama Administration’s policies have not made things better – in part because Obama has doubled down on the dumb idea of prosperity through debt. Not only has he exploded the federal government’s debt, he continues pushing banks to lend lavishly, encourages students to take on massive education loans (student loan debt is quickly approaching $1 trillion; there’s your next big financial crisis) and pushes the Federal Reserve to keep interest rates artificially low so credit will be easy.

And for people facing foreclosure on homes they never should have purchased in the first place, Obama pressures banks to keep them in the homes. What do you think that’s going to do? It’s going to keep these folks under financial strain while saddling the banks with more high-risk loans – the very thing that led the mortgage market to collapse in 2008. The people would be better off finding more affordable accommodations. The banks would be better off cutting their losses and re-selling the homes at realistic prices to more stable buyers. But none of this will happen because Obama refuses to let the market work as it should.

This is what really happened. The Blame Bush narrative we are sure to hear in Charlotte is a predictable attempt to mask the real reasons for the meltdown, and to hide the reality of Obama’s failures in dealing with the problem. He has made things worse – not better – because he never understood what happened in the first place and still doesn’t.

Too much capitalism was not the problem. Too little economic rationality was the problem, and that has only gotten worse under the most economically irrational president this nation has ever had.

 

Mia Love At The RNC

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/r2Cbvewaa7g?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>