GW Bush is now GW Hoover. We didn't see it coming, but the exit poll showed 1/2 blaming our current economy on Bush. This is history repeating itself.
Old review of the Housing Bubble
[If you know, nothing new here & you might as well scroll on past this section. But for those who don't know ...]
ACORN and the DNC fought hard to force banks into more ‘affordable housing’ and easier housing loans. The GOP tried to prevent a housing bubble, but [d] Maxine Waters and others cried ‘racism’. Republicans were cowed into backing off while Barney Frank, Maxine Waters, and many other democrats insisted that Fannie/Freddie [a government-run investment bank] were doing ‘outstanding’ work. They praised the ticking time bomb for being a marvel of success.
Thus banks were forced politically and legally into bad debt which they bundled and sold off to whatever investors they could. It was wrong of the banks to trick others, but that is always what happens when the government meddles — someone has to end up losing out unfairly, and that's usually people who have some money saved up but not enough to enjoy the same high level access as Goldman Sachs.
[So please don't think that I am bashing Bush unfairly — he was only one ounce of the problem while the DNC was fifteen times worse.]
Why GW Bush is Now GW Hoover:
This is an effort to discover the poison that blinded most conservatives to the point that Obama’s reelection was such a surprise.
A. We were desperate to defeat him. Fear of Obama forced most conservatives to ignore potential disunity over Romney. [And BTW, it goes to show how helpful Palin was at helping McCain when even Ryan could not help unite conservatives as well around Romney.]
B. Most conservatives were desperate to defeat the danger that liberalism and liberal cronyism are to our nation.
Such fears are easily forgiven because they stem from a deep love of our nation.
Disunity is a simple enough problem to understand, but what takes in-depth knowledge is to understand why half who voted blamed the Economic Meltdown on GW Bush.
GW’s Difficult Choice
The truth is that Bush himself was in a pickle. He lacked congressional support to reform Fannie/Freddie even though he pushed for it. And he lacked the courage to even try to slow down domestic spending increases. And Bin Laden destroyed then World Trade Center. In order to defeat terrorism, GW Bush had to make it at least appear that we remained strong economically. No one could predict what would happen to our economy from such a jolt to our financial system [as to lose the World Trade Center from a terror attack]. An economic collapse would have demoralized support for a serious war, and it would have raised the morale of our enemies. [We can see that throughout the world now that we are economically weaker.]
Was GW well intentioned or not? It doesn't really matter what Bush was thinking when he chose Paulson to be US Treasury Secretary. Bottom line: the President chose Paulson, and that was a disastrous choice. [Not that Geitner is any better.] In many ways Paulson was on board with [d] Barney Frank, [d] Chris Dodd, and other sleazy congress-critters. They wanted to make their cronies rich the easy way — by fleecing others with the tinsel of ‘technical legality’. And they succeeded.
Quick Take on Henry Paulson
Hank Paulson is a Goldman Sachs man [former Goldman Sachs chairman] who helped lobby for looser banking policies. How loose? After his lobbying was approved by the SEC in 2004, leveraging soared astronomically up to 33:1.
What does that mean? Some investment firms went into debt by thirty three times their net worth! That was the tip-off which led to Glenn Beck and others to predict an economic disaster. [Gee, ‘thanks’ for that, Hank.] That was the kind of sleazoid GW put in charge of the US Treasury.
Returning to proportion, however, our root problem was bad debt forced on investment banks. They didn't want to make those risky loans, but now that they had them, they had to sell the ‘stinky’ debt off to others in order to stay in business. So they bundled the debt, dressed it up, and paid rating agencies [one being Moody's] to put a rating on them. And the rating agencies they chose ‘just happened’ to put AAA ratings on debt so bad that another Goldman Sachs Paulson [John Paulson] turned into a ‘hedge fund short-artist’ who bet against Goldman Sachs debt. [John Paulson was a crony of [d] Senator Schumer btw.]
As US Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson did nothing to prevent what several people predicted — the Meltdown. But he was ‘quick on the draw’ to urge a complex bailout plan that protected businesses ‘too big to fail’. So quick was Paulson’s plan prepared it would seem that it might have been drafted well in advance. He persuaded GW to spread worldwide panic with warnings of doom if Paulson’s plan was not carried out. Congress called the Bush Administration's bluff and went past Paulson’s deadline of doom before acting. In the end the Meltdown of ‘08 was a pittance compared to the damage inflicted by government meddling in the past four years. Only FDR surpassed our current history of long-lasting economic failure.
From Russia with Oil
Let us also never forget that Russia urged China to dump stocks as a way of deliberately triggering the meltdown. We made ourselves vulnerable, and Putin wanted a ‘disarm America’ democrat [who also hates US oil production] to win in 2008. When stocks were mysteriously dumped that fateful night, three guesses ‘who’ and ‘why’. Ironically, Putin has financial clout because we haven't been drilling enough oil [despite having more untapped oil than any other nation on earth]. Now that Obama is reelected, his promise to Putin that ‘all bets are off’ will come true. Who can we thank? GW Bush, our modern Herbert Hoover, who thought we could crack our borders wide open while waging a war against the most dangerous terrorists in history [how ‘brilliant’]. GW Hoover, who chose Paulson to improve our economy.
Paulson believes Russia Orchestrated Meltdown:
Bernanki is the quoted source on the following ...
Rush's interview with KANJORSKI about Orchestrated M:
A Glance at Similar History:
Let a skilled liar monopolize an ounce of truth, and you give that liar a pound of persuasion. That's what ‘Hoovered’ GW the same way FDR had blamed Herbert Hoover for his own economic failure. Hoover had meddled too much with the economy. Talk about ‘similar’ — we had even helped bail out the Weimar Republic, and we had chopped up our banks into little bits during the Hoover Administration while Canada weathered out the ‘30s quite smoothly because Canadians left their banks alone. Canadian banks remained large and strong. Perhaps we could have survived those two tweaks, but there was more.
But FDR didn't let that much truth get in the way. He monopolized a little truth — “Hoover failed” — and twisted it around to say that Hoover did ‘nothing’. With an ounce of truth, FDR was allowed to get away with a pound of deceit. He not only got elected by blaming Hoover, but re-elected more than any other US president in history. All he had to do was promise that he would try new ideas, ‘unlike Hoover’.
Here's the truth about Hoover and ‘nothing’:
“In November 1929, Hoover took an active role in protecting the economy. He met with industrialists and union leaders and pushed them into a deal: Industry would not cut wages. Unions would not strike. If there wasn't enough work, jobs would be shared rather than prompting layoffs. Hoover believed high wages were the key to prosperity. For employers, he created policies that allowed firms to cooperate in order to avoid “cut-throat competition” for labor.
“On the labor side, Hoover signed the Davis-Bacon Act forcing local governments to pay union wages on public works and the Norris-LaGuardia Act outlawing injunctions against strikes and picketing.
“Hoover's policies did what they were supposed to do: By late 1931, real hourly earnings in manufacturing had increased by more than 10% (adjusted for deflation of prices). Yet manufacturing hours worked had declined by more than 40%, even more than total output, which fell about 20%. By the end of 1931, the general unemployment rate was 15.9%, and it would get still worse for two more years.”
Yes, Hoover failed — that was the ounce of truth. But was it truly ‘laissez-faire’? He did ‘nothing’? Conservatives did not know how to ‘handle’ or ‘massage’ the simple truth — Hoover failed. And thus they floundered while FDR forged ahead with his ‘New Deal’ new ideas which failed for a longer time and would have continued to fail if not for WWII — the rest of the world's factories were in constant danger of being blown to smithereens. Their GNP tried up, and the US became an near-monopoly as the only industrial power to enjoy the combination of abundant raw materials, industrial safety, unmarred infrastructure, and comparative tranquility. The New Deal was saved by the [war] bell.
The WHOLE Truth
While we should most certainly continue to explain our side of the story on the Economic Meltdown of ‘08, why should we cut GW and Paulson any slack? We don't want investors being swindled, and why should any banking system be allowed to leverage itself 33:1? It was legalized fraud, and too many conservatives ignored that part of the equation, and that gave our nation's fifth columnists the perfect propaganda tool — a little truth. Let us speak the truth, the WHOLE truth, and nothing but the truth from here on out. Leave nothing for the leftists to counter with other than their old standby: lies.
I wrote a vanity, but just for you guys. Post 106. You can also find it in my profile. This is history repeating itself. Important to understand I think.
That’s about the best help I know how to offer for now, that and beware of a multi-million-voter block from illegal aliens suddenly allowed to vote [or Peurto Rico statehood] — that would be concrete over the coffin.
Bye for a week or five.