… only political in nature.
It is neither a genuine concern for the needy nor a humane feeling for the” poor” borne out of compassion. To some Media opportunists that walk by night, it is attractively artificial worth more than enough to earn their keeps.
And for that anomaly Obama, the president, should stop racial predatory lending and redlining otherwise financial rescue repeats forever at the expense of the taxpayers.
Here’s the gist of this Memo to Obama: Unless the existing policy of predatory lending and reverse redlining to return a political favor to the economically disadvantaged that made history by voting the first African-American president to office is stopped, this so-called “rescue” of the economy will repeat and repeat forever.
I am referring to predatory lending as a traditional politically correct economic policy resorted to and promoted by cheap politicians. I also take exception to reverse redlining in return as a favor to the massive “poor” who elected Obama president.
In one of my newspaper columns on predatory banking in acquisitive economics, I warned that racial lending and redlining would create a boom for an interment market … in fact right in the dark corner, disaster would liein ambush.
I didn’t miss: Two years later, we were in a financial jam, and still are to this day.
Today, this urgent memorandum to a congenital politicking President — based on orthodox economic perspective that neither requires the brain of rocket scientists nor does it need the intellectual snobbery of the Federal Reserve and the superciliousness of Ben Bernanke’s head that Austrian economists with an axe to grind love to chop off – is for the public to understand easily like they do the back of their palm the following advisory: Stop race-tainted predatory lending and redlining in the banking system before committing the future of the next generation to a perpetual government rescue of an economy that is spinning downward and eventually ends up down the drain.
Predatory lending is greed in the financial and banking system that destroys for gain. Every suffering American is experiencing the proof of greed that led to this recessionary economic meltdown.
Redlining is discriminate lending in high-risk areas regardless of whether or not consumers are prime borrowers but for their race are discriminated against or “… refused loans, insurance and/or other financial services.” The reverse of this redlining policy in return to a promised election favor is what causes our financial suffering today.
Don’t get this wrong. Tragically, in my studies more than 90% of the population got this awfully wrong. It’s the other way around. The general public is discriminated against … credits and favors go more to the browbeaten population enclave of the masses politically powerful enough to make even an obscure or a not good enough politician whose birth certificate is held suspect become President of the United States.
Let me explain from a Keynesian economist’s point of view how intricate, nay clever, this mistaken anomalous situation came to exist: Normally massive, predatory sub-prime home mortgages and financial borrowings to prop up businesses would put money into the hands of the consuming public; the Keynesian strategy in resorting to this grandiose economic plan is to increase households’ purchasing power that would create not just a robust but also a hyper economy.
Since President Bill Clinton’s time, to enfranchise the economically disadvantaged and/or “bailout” the “poor” from their predicament has been a predominantly Liberal populist idea that makes a sucker out of politically correct politicians and the innocent public. It sucks because it is an insidious and powerful inducement to fair-minded Americans to harbor hatred when they start to think and believe that blacks and minorities do not get a square deal or do not enjoy the same social and economic privileges the whites have, because they are being racially discriminated against.
This supposedly “subjugated” segment of the American population is considered a victim of predatory lending and redlining and that government policy should “rescue” their kind from bigotry and prejudice. It eventually drove Fannie/Freddie Mae and similar financial institutions in the world of credit and finance to shed crocodile tears that were more wet and torrential than the salivating mouth of
’s 4th District Congressman Barney Frank who defended the greed-motivated disastrous mortgage and banking operations of lending organizations in behalf and for the benefit of the “subjugated poor”.
Considering that this politically correct strategy of “helping the poor” is extremely popular, the more popular it is the more it hides the tragedy it creates. Opportunist politicians like Frank whose honesty has been held not worth a dime or political clowns who were not too frank in their dealings with the general public, are usually over-indulgent in speechifying this fashionable crusade which reminds us of fanatics in straitjackets, thereby making themselves champions of the cause of the down-trodden to gain support and patronage; it doesn’t really matter if the disastrous effects of their political gimmickry suck the economy down the tube.
For the current background scenario, here’s what we are looking at: Huge financial bailouts are emergency measures that are necessary in a crisis like what we have now. And that should end the argument. But it does not … instead the people’s emotional hang-ups and fear hit the roof!
What makes discerning Americans very angry about this mind-boggling spendathon is not how big is the rip-off when Obama increases taxes to fund the program, but how insidious the villainy of its purpose is hidden behind it. It is this corked anger that will not make this suspicious if not ill-motivated move of the president succeed, more so when his frequent public appearances are merely grandstanding programmed to win a political standing ovation here and abroad.
In other words, Obama’s economic recovery policies should not be a multi-hued chameleon pulsating like fireflies inside a transparent glass just meant to attract the attention of the Media. His brain trusts should have a sparkle of ingenuity to recognize the fact that turning this country into a socialist republic in the guise of helping the poor, is an anathema to free
, known as the leader of top-rated capitalist countries in the world.
We are not just scared but scarred survivors of politically correct maneuvers of politicians that even to our sore eyes we can see where they are coming from. The oddity of the Obama government’s promise “to spread the wealth” is no different from a compulsive wastrel masticating the earnings of hardworking people with income of $250,000 and higher [captive money through IRS]. Pumping this fortune down the stream for economic recovery is a Keynesian theory that is more abused in the political arena than it is badly exploited anywhere else.
In television [History Channel], we watch the hoary-gory killing of those weak jungle strugglers before they were eaten alive for the survival of the fittest; in Washington, D.C. where the jungle of predatory politics never changed, we are witnessing a horde of financial prowlers about to sink their fangs on the neck of their captured prey [the taxpayers] for the kill.
Political trickery is the rule of the game. Concern for the “poor” is a good cover for driving the country downhill towards socialism; the sacrilegious mantra to achieve this purpose is “welfareism” that resonates in the wilds of Wall Street and Congress where the Obama government and the people opposed to socialism struggles for survival.
Ironically, if the people win in their struggle against Marxist socialism, the Obama government will go bust; if the latter wins, the American people end up in the open jaws of an ideological ogre called Marxist Collectivism that an American president will be hosting in this country for the first time.
How does this new government’s concern for the “poor” claim legitimacy to warrant squandering of the people’s money for welfare in the guise of “economic recovery”? Let’s consult past statistics that established the trend. Surveys said “…black family poverty rate has been stuck around 30% since 1970, about 3 times the rate for white families …This persistent poverty rate is the single most depressing fact about the state of black America today… In 1995, 85% of poor black children resided in fatherless families.
"Black men have a much higher poverty rate than whites …Black men were more than twice as likely to be unemployed as white men (23.9% vs. 10.2%).”
Obama’s heart seems to bleed with what appears as his passionate concern for this massive “poor” in the country. He had told a forum of black
that his policies will make a “big difference” to African-Americans who are harder hit by the economic downturn … “The unemployment rate among black Americans is a full five points higher than the rate among Americans as a whole.” Obama, said as if the unemployment problem of the blacks was the fault of the whites.
His plan for “economic recovery” was drawn around this racial concern for the “poor”, which by all intents and purposes is politically correct. There are reasons to believed that Obama was enthused by his father’s socialist dream, and inspired by his wife’s dogged determination “… to utilize all … present and future resources to benefit this [black] community first and foremost.” Mrs. Michelle Robinson Obama.
But is this personal interest in the welfare of the nation’s economically disadvantaged really the real McCoy?
The truth about Obama’s family explains why
is gravely in doubt, and that his interest for the “poor” is fake or if not, only skin-deep.
Obama has a half-brother in his late 20s who lives in extreme poverty … in a “two-by-three meter shack in Haruma on the outskirts of
…” His name is George Hussein Onyango Obama. The President mentioned his brother George in his autobiography as a “beautiful boy with a rounded head”.
In a quoted interview, George said he had met his brother [President Obama] twice. The President knew his situation in Huruma,
. “I live here on less than a dollar a month … I live like a recluse, no-one knows I exist” [except his brother, he implies, who is the President of the United States].
With no help whatsoever, George’s touching frustration should have broken Obama’s heart that bleeds for the “poor”, but strangely, his brother’s “extreme poverty” didn’t even make a dent of sympathy much more showed a sign of human compassion that the American public expects from the President. There is a complete blackout in the Media on this strange behavior since Obama’s heart started to bleed for the” poor”.
If Obama’s heart genuinely bleeds for the “poor”, his humanity and compassion should start with his family, more specifically with his brother who needs help more than our homeless in this country do. Here we have at least food and shelter for the homeless. There is none of this kind in the hinterlands of
. There is this old adage that charity begins at home. But in this case, charity did not start in the family, nor will it ever start at home for George who is living in a wretched penury.
But George’s “extreme poverty” in
is different from that of the poor blacks in
. Here, in this country George can’t vote … the poor of
And if George can vote in
, Obama wouldn’t care less, would he? This proves that here we have a lot of politicians without human compassion … what we have is a lot of political animals here than a safari would find there in the wilderness of
It is only a “political concern” for the poor that we are talking about in this country. In his campaign speeches to get elected president, Obama made a covenant with the “poor” of
that runs something like this: You scratch my back, and I scratch yours!
“They” scratched his back all right, and made him president. He is now scratching “their” back, and what do we have … a massive welfare spending in the guise of “stimulus package” for economic recovery!
Where does most of the money go? Evidence shows that it goes to places “… that supported President Obama in last year’s presidential election …” a stimulus package that in whatever angle you see is actually an Election Payback! At the tip of the iceberg, $17.0 billion was the first return “scratch” of the back given as financial aid to those who “scratched” his back into becoming president.
This kind of political mercy, not necessarily borne out of human compassion, is worse than predatory lending that brought this outrageous state of affairs we are now in, to the edge of collapse.
What is unfolding before our eyes is actually a reverse redlining, where the general welfare of all Americans is discriminated against for the benefit of only the chosen ones to honor a popular election promise that up to now continues to ride on the back of the gullible out of traditional politicking.
Unless the head of this political hydra is cut off – and there are many of them in our body politick – the public is condemned to a manacle of paying more tribute to the government in the form of higher taxes to fund Obama’s perpetual “stimulus package” to “rescue” a floundering economy that is diseased by predatory lending and reverse redlining. #
© Copyright Edwin A. Sumcad. Access NWS July 13, 2009.
The writer is an award-winning journalist. Know more about the author by reading his published editorials and feature articles or you may e-mail your comment to firstname.lastname@example.org.