Friday, April 23, 2010

Obama's Big Wall Street Adventure

When I read a propaganda piece such as this, gushing praise for the hard work Obama is doing, I can't help but feel a bit sickened.

First, however, I must give credit where credit is due.  Usurping the freedom and liberty of Americans progressively, piece by piece, must truly be hard work.

I would suggest a minor revision when stating Obama's role in financial reform might produce a more acceptable accounting of the truth:


"Obama's role consists of two parts: stirring up public outrage over the failure of government regulators to address the sub-prime mortgage problem which gave Wall Street the collateral which they bundled and traded in an unregulated derivative market, and to bribe or bully members of congress behind closed doors into supporting yet another huge grab by the federal government of what used to be known as the private sector."

The koolaid drinkers cheer wildly in support while the rational thinkers, who see this latest power grab for what it truly is, cry out in opposition. As with the Obamacare debacle, both sides want some type of reform of the financial industry, but the disagreement lies in how to accomplish this.  And, as with the Obamacare debacle, there is no way but Obama's way.

I marvel at the blatant hypocrisy Obama exhibits as he implies some involvement in underhanded dealings by McConnell's meetings with Wall Street CEOs.  Amazingly, Obama met with insurance, pharmaceutical, and health industry leaders on several occasions prior to and during his headlong push for Obamacare.

This behavior is typical of all Leftists, who use such tactics to denigrate their opponents for doing the same thing they engage in.  Of course, we all know that Obama was meeting secretly with these people to find the best way to help all Americans, while McConnell's nefarious purpose was to deny St. Obama yet another opportunity to help all Americans.  What, you don't believe that?  Of course you don't; no sane person would.

The standard Democrat response to everything is bigger government, more control, more bureaucracy, more cost, more waste, and more fraud.  And, when taxpayers show concern over more spending, the Democrats simply go on the offensive by charging any GOP opposition as childish, obstructive political gamesmanship from the "Party of No."

In front of hand-picked crowds of supporters, he continues his perpetual campaign and presents his false choices of either accepting his massive growth of government or "doing nothing".  Of supporting his version of "financial reform" or accepting a runaway Wall Street.

I have yet to hear from Team Obama anything addressing the government policies which set the stage for our financial near-collapse.  What about the push to increase sub-prime mortgages?  Who is going to investigate the role of Fannie and Freddie?  What about Dodd, Frank, and all the Dems who fought tooth and nail denying any improprieties?

Obama is more than anxious to pass everything he can before the midterm elections.  This mad rush to increase federal control must be met head on.  I think we can do a lot better than allow those responsible for our crisis to re-write the rules.  McConnell and the Republicans feel this way as well.

It is not a coincidence that most of the big investment firms on Wall Street are actually in favor of this new legislation.  It permanently establishes a "Too Big To Fail" mentality, allowing the Treasury to act independent of Congress to do whatever it wants to with any financial company it feels may be a systemic risk.

One proposed solution would be to reinstate and strengthen the power of the existing regulatory agencies.  Lord knows, we have enough in place to do the job.  This would certainly help reduce the logjam that is the federal government.  The problem with big government is big government.  One hand never knows what the other is doing.  It is a model of inefficiency, yet it continues to grow.

But the grand ego of Obama does not allow small, quick, and targeted solutions. With Obama, everything must be (all together now): "transparent, accountable, and unprecedented in scope."  Funny, but he never mentions anything about getting it right.

No comments:

Post a Comment

something on your mind?