Keith Nesbit wrote on May 19, 2009 01:33 PM: While it is true that GOP leadership is in limbo, their is no shortage of conservatives in the working man and woman with household income of $60k to $120k, in my experience. Few people were fond of Bush-Cheney. That poor connection spawned an opening that Obama filled with charisma and an mighty campaign organization. Beyond Obama there is an extaordinary lack of attractive liberal politicians: Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, Al Gore, John Kerry, Joe Biden, etc.. Obama is pressing for a debt-piling array of initiatives that will extend government debt to 80% of GDP. The un-wealthy, below $250k in income, will be tapped to pay more taxes. Buyers for US debt may balk. Then the 25 to 35 year old middle-income taxpayers will become disillusioned with Obama and the Democrats. They will chafe at the notion of helping those with low work ethic (no-one begrudges the true needy).
The consertvatives will be in a position to regain some lost political ground. You can't write off conservatives because of a leadership lull.

patrick wrote on May 17, 2009 10:42 AM: Ted:

"Economists and financial people writing a Federal Reserve report, including Jeffrey W. Gunther, who also wrote a report on CRA for the Cato Institute, have wondered if the CRA was – or at least had become – irrelevant, because it was not needed to force banks to make profitable loans to a variety of borrowers."

According to writers from the Cato Institute, a "free market" "think tank", the CRA had NOTHING to do with banks lending money; they did it BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO MAKE MONEY.

Imagine that.

Mike wrote on May 17, 2009 09:10 AM: Ted Sell;
Sowell wrote a column in July of 2008 stating that the world economic collapse is the result of poor black people getting mortgages fro homes they could not afford because of the Community Reinvestment Act.

Regardless of the arguments pro or con on this legislation as public policy, any assertion that these loans (most CRA loans are still performing-ie current and not in default), caused the collapse of the worlds' economies is absurd.

crausgov

Businessweek called Sowell's assertions "a scam".
"Not surprisingly given the higher degree of supervision, loans made under the CRA program were made in a more responsible way than other subprime loans. CRA loans carried lower rates than other subprime loans and were less likely to end up securitized into the mortgage-backed securities that have caused so many losses, according to a recent study by the law firm Traiger & Hinckley"
businessweek

Lack of regulation and the SEC allowing 40-1 leveraging (speculative credit) is what brought down the economy in 1929 and in 2008.

Ted Sell wrote on May 17, 2009 07:58 AM: One problem, Brummett, the collapse of the financial markets is a RESULT of REGULATION, not deregulation.

Read books for a change Brummett; I recommend Thomas Sowell's new book to learn why and how the financial markets collapsed.

MacDougall wrote on May 17, 2009 07:07 AM: Funny how every one says that Clinton won the 92 election, he in fact did, but the way it is usually phrased is that he trounced George I. Well, not even close, had Ross Perot not run for President Billy Bob and Hillary Jane would still be in Arkansas trying to squelch stories about extra marital affairs and making a bunch of money. Billy Bob through White Water and Hillary Jane through her exquisite knowledge of the financial markets.