Obama Giving More Mortgages to Welfare Bums

I posted my opinion about Joe Biden charging Secret Services rent to protect him just a few hours ago. I qualified it as a moral low, but now we have a competitor to that.

I just found out that Obama’s pitbull Eric Holder (remember him? he refused to prosecute the New Balck Panthers for voting intimidation) has threatened several US banks that they discriminate against minorities (mostly black of course).

He is upset that people with no jobs, no credit, and perspectives have been discriminated against when applying for a mortgage. Now he says that the banks “must apply more flexible underwriting standards”. Translation: give all those bums the money they want so that they would vote for my master Barry, if anything goes wrong, just eat the loss.

Those rules are supposed to apply when the banks are lending money to bums from the proverbial “inner cities”.

Didin’t exactly the same situation cause the financial catastrophe a few years ago?

Yes, the agenda of Barry and his friends Jeremiah Wright, Jesse Jackson, and Al Sharpton is more than clear.

Would you like to give him the option to impose it on you for another four years?


Be Sociable, Share!


  1. The Lone Ranger says:

    I agree with you 100% Admirath. Clinton is the chief culprit here, but not the only one to add to the housing masrket crisis in the USIt was the Clinton Administration that went to ridiculous lengths to increase the national homeownership rate. It promoted paper-thin downpayments and pushed for ways to get lenders to give mortgage loans to first-time buyers with low wages, little or no savings and bad credit. It’s clear now that the erosion of lending standards pushed prices up by increasing demand, and later led to waves of defaults by bums who never should have been given a mortgage in the first place. Eric Holder, disgraceful though he is, is only continuing a Democratic tradition started by Slick Willy.

    1. admiwrath says:

      Yes, apparently everything will go on until the house of cards collapses. I simply don’t get the whole idea of providing prosperity to bums on borrowed money, other than hoping for their votes. But that scheme is not something, which is the long-term interest of the country. So the conclusion most likely is that the destruction of the economy is somewhat good for those bums.

  2. SM ISAC says:

    “So the conclusion most likely is that the destruction of the economy is somewhat good for those bums.” My suspicion also. I heard John Dobko (SunTV) say that “Obama is silly, not sinister”. However my feeling is the latter. I would like to believe that it is going to be the ordinary grassroots Americans who will save the country. Four more years to finish off the job? NO, NO, NO!!!

  3. Adam says:

    The ‘people defaulting on mortgages caused the sub-prime crisis’ narrative is pure BS. A foreclosed-on house can simply be resold…IF there’s a market for it. The problem is that–barring waves of mass immigration–the homebuilding sectors of Canada, the U.S., Australia and other countries are NOT sustainable without a constant stream of warm bodies. The banks couldn’t just boot the failed mortagors out and resell the houses, because there wasn’t a market for them.

    You had ongoing housing starts without a market to absorb them. You had debts insured and the insurers reinsured, without adequate cash reserves. You had credit rating agencies paid by companies to issue credit reports for them (a staggeringly bold case of conflict of interest), with other financial companies (e.g., ING) acquiring mortgage issuers with bad portfolios. You had people trading debt portfolios like baseball cards. And then you had a crazy financial smoke and mirrors show erected over all of this–what those nutty Marxists call ‘imaginary capitalism.’ Finally, our globalised economy tied everyone together into a massive ball of string, with interlinked sectors effectively out of the reach of regulators (e.g., requiring reinsurers to have adequate reserves).

    As it stands today, the homebuilding industry is NOT sustainable–financially, as well as environmentally. The warm body demands of the financial-real estate complex are behind immigration policy in developed countries. And there are a frightening number of financial instruments and products which have little relation to the real world–from short-selling to hedge funds, to derivatives–which are nothing more than tricky, opaque gambling schemes. Deadbeat borrowers are a good scapegoat for staggeringly crooked financial and real estate sectors. Too many conservatives also play the Ayn Rand card, in thinking that the private sector is always right.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *