Monday, June 27, 2011
The Man In The Middle...cogito ergo sum: TOO BIG TO FAIL-did the movie fail?
The Man In The Middle...cogito ergo sum: TOO BIG TO FAIL-did the movie fail?: "Since I have nothing better to do as I am recuperating from the poke to fix a medial meniscus in my left knee, sit back and relax because t..."
Sunday, June 26, 2011
TOO BIG TO FAIL-did the movie fail?
Since I have nothing better to do as I am recuperating from the poke to fix a medial meniscus in my left knee, sit back and relax because this politically motivated movie review might be even longer than some of my usually long winded posts.
The Too Big To Fail made for TV movie had a riveting story and some of the actors were outstanding. BUT, moviemaking is the business I came from, so while seeing how the cast of characters worked thru the financial crisis that threatened the world economy was engrossing TV, it might be wise to remember that Liberal Hollywood wrote and directed the film. I mention this because agenda driven people tend to avoid that which might harm their cause. TBTF is no exception. A friend wrote to me in an email "the story is clear"; to me the operative word is 'story.'
The TBTF "story" began when it hit the fan in late 2008. But the real history began when President Carter established the CRA in 1978. The CRA, perhaps a well intended social program, but definitely a calculated political move, was kept alive and occasionally embellished by presidents and Congresses that succeeded Carter. Ipso facto the housing bubble and banking crisis evolved over a 30 year period, finally bursting in 2008. Now, as much as a group of genetically deranged people are convinced Bush caused the financial crisis, it's just not the way it happened.
As we all know, once a social program is established by the Feds, no matter how fiscally damaging it might be to the nation, it will live forever because there isn't a politician alive (or dead) with the courage to publicly say "sorry, we no longer can allow banks to approve loans unless the applicant can afford a 20% down payment or has the collateral to back the loan." The long line of gutless politicians, Democrat and Republican, queued up long before Bush graduated college. To say there was no Fin Reg before Bush is a joke because there was none before Bubba, 41, or Reagan either. And actually, the previous statement is wrong because there were banking rules in place since FDR but as we know the interpretation and enforcement of "rules" depends upon who is doing the interpreting and enforcing them...which brings us to another politically driven omission in the TBTF "story."
I mentioned that there was a long line of politicians who perpetuated the financial credit scam by looking the other way. But one Congressman was asked the question in front of a video camera a few times and each time gave the same answer. The question was, "are Fannie and Freddie in jeopardy of failing?" The answer on all occasions was "the institutions are solid." The Congressman answering the question was Barney Frank, who in 2003 was the ranking member of the House Ways and Means (Banking) Committee. When the Dems took over the Congress in 2006 Barney was rewarded for his outstanding service and promoted to Chairman of the Committee by Nancy Pelosi. So what?, one might ask; well, Barney's pronouncement that F&F were "solid" was either a cover-up or a remarkable misjudgment on Frank's part. The two institutions backed 98% of the home loans in the US. So Barney's flip and incorrect evaluation had literally set the stage for the upcoming crisis. Had Frank told the truth when he was first asked the question in 2003 then in 2005, etc., some of the crisis might have been averted. The 3-5 years leading up to the crisis allowed the derivatives business to crystallize to the point of no return. Had the Senate and House banking committees investigated Fannie and Freddie in 2003 or 2004 or 2005 the obvious would have been discovered and the crisis might have been mitigated to some degree.
Oh, I almost forgot, the person who asked Barney the question about the solvency of Freddie and Fannie multiple times was President Bush.
Re: the problem with the recently passed Fin Reg, which I have stated many times over the past couple of years is that incredibly, I repeat, incredibly Fannie and Freddie were OMITTED FROM THE LAW passed by the Democrat controlled Senate and House. And President Obama actually signed it. Begs a question or two, doesn't it? Sorry, friends, these are facts and you can look 'em up. If you want to give Obama credit for signing a toothless bill into law, fine. By the way, Bush is off the hook; and as hard as they tried the Democrats and the NYT couldn't lay the blame on him for the banking crisis. And one can only imagine how hard they tried, probably to the point of being hospitalized to treat exhaustion.
Back to TBTF. So my questions about the movie were: why didn't the producers create the perspective with the entire time frame of events beginning in 1978?; and why were Barney Frank's comments/evaluations glossed over?; and why weren't thirty years of federal politicians called to task? The answers are probably where this screed began; the project was produced by an agenda driven Hollywood.
THE END
The Too Big To Fail made for TV movie had a riveting story and some of the actors were outstanding. BUT, moviemaking is the business I came from, so while seeing how the cast of characters worked thru the financial crisis that threatened the world economy was engrossing TV, it might be wise to remember that Liberal Hollywood wrote and directed the film. I mention this because agenda driven people tend to avoid that which might harm their cause. TBTF is no exception. A friend wrote to me in an email "the story is clear"; to me the operative word is 'story.'
The TBTF "story" began when it hit the fan in late 2008. But the real history began when President Carter established the CRA in 1978. The CRA, perhaps a well intended social program, but definitely a calculated political move, was kept alive and occasionally embellished by presidents and Congresses that succeeded Carter. Ipso facto the housing bubble and banking crisis evolved over a 30 year period, finally bursting in 2008. Now, as much as a group of genetically deranged people are convinced Bush caused the financial crisis, it's just not the way it happened.
As we all know, once a social program is established by the Feds, no matter how fiscally damaging it might be to the nation, it will live forever because there isn't a politician alive (or dead) with the courage to publicly say "sorry, we no longer can allow banks to approve loans unless the applicant can afford a 20% down payment or has the collateral to back the loan." The long line of gutless politicians, Democrat and Republican, queued up long before Bush graduated college. To say there was no Fin Reg before Bush is a joke because there was none before Bubba, 41, or Reagan either. And actually, the previous statement is wrong because there were banking rules in place since FDR but as we know the interpretation and enforcement of "rules" depends upon who is doing the interpreting and enforcing them...which brings us to another politically driven omission in the TBTF "story."
I mentioned that there was a long line of politicians who perpetuated the financial credit scam by looking the other way. But one Congressman was asked the question in front of a video camera a few times and each time gave the same answer. The question was, "are Fannie and Freddie in jeopardy of failing?" The answer on all occasions was "the institutions are solid." The Congressman answering the question was Barney Frank, who in 2003 was the ranking member of the House Ways and Means (Banking) Committee. When the Dems took over the Congress in 2006 Barney was rewarded for his outstanding service and promoted to Chairman of the Committee by Nancy Pelosi. So what?, one might ask; well, Barney's pronouncement that F&F were "solid" was either a cover-up or a remarkable misjudgment on Frank's part. The two institutions backed 98% of the home loans in the US. So Barney's flip and incorrect evaluation had literally set the stage for the upcoming crisis. Had Frank told the truth when he was first asked the question in 2003 then in 2005, etc., some of the crisis might have been averted. The 3-5 years leading up to the crisis allowed the derivatives business to crystallize to the point of no return. Had the Senate and House banking committees investigated Fannie and Freddie in 2003 or 2004 or 2005 the obvious would have been discovered and the crisis might have been mitigated to some degree.
Oh, I almost forgot, the person who asked Barney the question about the solvency of Freddie and Fannie multiple times was President Bush.
Re: the problem with the recently passed Fin Reg, which I have stated many times over the past couple of years is that incredibly, I repeat, incredibly Fannie and Freddie were OMITTED FROM THE LAW passed by the Democrat controlled Senate and House. And President Obama actually signed it. Begs a question or two, doesn't it? Sorry, friends, these are facts and you can look 'em up. If you want to give Obama credit for signing a toothless bill into law, fine. By the way, Bush is off the hook; and as hard as they tried the Democrats and the NYT couldn't lay the blame on him for the banking crisis. And one can only imagine how hard they tried, probably to the point of being hospitalized to treat exhaustion.
Back to TBTF. So my questions about the movie were: why didn't the producers create the perspective with the entire time frame of events beginning in 1978?; and why were Barney Frank's comments/evaluations glossed over?; and why weren't thirty years of federal politicians called to task? The answers are probably where this screed began; the project was produced by an agenda driven Hollywood.
THE END
Albiwan...
Thursday, June 16, 2011
PERFECT CANDIDATE FOR 2012
Allen West is unlike any other candidate with respect to qualifications, ethics, aspirations, electability:
1- First of all, there is too much ridiculous talk about the qualifications of a candidate to federal office. The Democrats' "Palin is not qualified to be President" is laughable because all of those "qualified" candidates from the 2006 Congress are seriously responsible for the current $14.4trillion national debt. If that is what "qualified" can accomplish, then give me one of the Three Stooges; they could not have done worse than the 2006 Democrat Congress and President Obama.
2- Allen West, although a junior Congressman, is eminently qualified because he is smart, logical and understands honor and ethics, two qualities in very short supply in the federal government because the concept of career politician is not conducive to either being honorable or being ethical, not to mention operating a republic. When a person goes to work every day and compromises his principles in order to gain re-election, the result is a corrupted system. When excellence is not the goal, why bother. Allen West is not the type of man to compromise his principles for personal gain to the detriment of the country.
3- Allen aspires to be the best public servant he can be rather than being the best politician he can be. He is better than that; and having put his life on the line to defend his country, it is inconceivable that he would place his own self interest ahead of that of his country, as have too many of the 536 currently in office.
4- Allen separates himself from the current group of GOP candidates because none of them can win and Allen can. He will split the ethnic vote with Obama but will win the majority of conservative and independent voters and consequently the Presidency.
I would also hope that he will take the time to do what Obama shamelessly wouldn't and that is to lift up the poor urban communities. Over two years ago I wrote a blog entitled "Obama's Indelible Mark." Obama had an opportunity to leave an indelible mark on his presidency that no other President in history could have even attempted. He could have walked down the middle of 110th Street in Harlem and given Bill Cosby's "Dutch Uncle" speech. Remember when Cosby gave his speech urging the black community to accept responsibility, to get an education, stop selling drugs to black youth, stop having children out of wedlock, and stop black on black crime. For his concern he was excoriated by the black community's leadership for speaking his mind. You see, the so called community "leaders" were first in line to suck on the teat of the public dole and did not want to lose their supporters and potentially their offices or positions. How dare Cosby challenge blacks to accept responsibility for their economic plight and the crumbling of their community. It was the white man's oppression at the blame. No doubt the reaction to Cosby's speech was enough to convince President Obama not to attempt any action such as Cosby's even though the President knew Cosby's analysis of the black community was spot on. Obama feared losing the black vote and the 2012 election so it would have taken courage for Obama to press that hot button. And since courage has generally not been a word associated with the President, instead he forced through convoluted healthcare and financial regulation while the country was hemorrhaging jobs. Some indelible mark...
I believe that Congressman West will do the right thing even if it might cost him an election. The black community cannot dig out from the hole it is in with 70% of its children born out of wedlock. The family in the black community is destroyed and must be resurrected or the community will remain down. Allen West is the man who can turn the momentum to the positive.
5- Allen West is also an excellent communicator. He speaks with wisdom, knowledge, empathy, strength and straight from the heart, not lifelessly as does Obama from a tele-prompter.
Albiwan..
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
