Obama Regime Sets Up to Dump Disaster on GOP Congress in 2011

[Talismen]

It's pretty easy to see the scenario playing out, and I'm glad Rush is talking about this. Hopefully others will follow his lead and start talking about it as well:

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_071210/content/01125106.guest.html

(snips)

Obama Regime Sets Up to Dump Disaster on GOP Congress in 2011
July 12, 2010

(...)

"Economists See US Recovery Weakening."  This is from Reuters over the weekend.  "The US economy will lose steam --" (laughing) it has no steam "-- as the year progresses but will not slide back into recession."  Now, Greenspan said last week in congressional testimony that the economy is in a pause.  We're just kind of in a pause here, and the debt commission, Irksome Bowles and Alan Simpson Babe appeared on television yesterday, and they have painted a picture of dire consequences.  All of the details are coming up, and Alan Simpson Babe had an interesting quote, he said, "Yeah, yeah, a lot of people are hoping we fail."  Who's hoping they fail?  Has anybody said they hoped the deficit commission or the debt commission fails?  And then Simpson predictably ripped into a bunch of Republicans for not being on board and ready to get up to speed to do what's necessary, and all this thing was coded language for get ready for tax increases.  And Irksome Bowles said something that's patently false.  He said we can't grow our way out of this.  Excuse me, Irksome, it's the only way out of this.  The only way out of this is to grow.  We cannot tax our way out of this.

No society has ever taxed itself to prosperity. No society has ever taxed away debt and all you have to do is look at Great Britain or any of the European socialist democracies.  They've been taxing and taxing and taxing and their debt has been rising and rising and rising.  It's a combination of spending cuts and growth, pure and simple.  But now the Democrat on the committee says, "We can't grow our way out of it."  Well, that's not healthy.  I mean that doesn't sound good.  Here's the dirty little secret.  I was playing golf some weeks ago with some people who live and work in the financial industry.  And they said, "Look, there's no way we're ever gonna pay this debt off.  We can't.  It's physically, fiscally, monetarily impossible to pay this debt off."  This is why it's been run up so high.  All this is being done on purpose.  The only thing we can do is to make it look like we're serious about it.  We have to continue to get foreign investment.  We have to have the debt purchased by other countries, other entities, and the only way we can do that is to make it look like we're dealing with it.  And the only way to make it look like we're dealing with it is to raise taxes, which, that's what's going to happen.  That's why this commission will not report until December, until after the elections. 

In the midst of a Democrat lame duck session where they are going to attempt -- John Fund had the piece last week in the Wall Street Journal -- where they're going to attempt to ram everything they can through Congress, get signed by Obama, before the new Congress takes effect.  This is after they will have been rejected.  Even Gibbs, the smartest White House press secretary ever said yesterday on Meet the Depressed, "Yeah, yeah, the Republicans could take over the House."  The first time anybody in the regime has said that this could happen.  Speaking of regimes, Fidel Castro's out there.  Fidel Castro's going on television and radio, he's gonna make some sort of speech.  The purpose of the speech is to warn everybody that nuclear war is unavoidable, it's coming, and it's between us and Iran.  So you have all of that going on.  The Democrats are going to be soundly rejected in November at the ballot box.  The Democrats, before they lose their seats, before they are sworn out of office, new Congress doesn't get sworn until January, in November and December, they're going to go (raspberry) to the whole country, and they'll do it happily to everybody who threw them out, "Okay, here's what we're going to do, you don't like us here, we're going to ram card check through; gonna ram cap and trade; we're gonna do all kinds of tax increases; we're gonna finalize this financial regulatory reform bill." 
 
 
And then come December here comes Alan Simpson Babe and Irksome Bowles with their recommendations on getting rid of this debt cancer.  It's not gonna be a pretty couple of months.  Then the Republicans are gonna have a challenge.  They had better run in this election cycle on agenda items featuring pro growth so that when the victory happens in November they have a mandate.  It's not enough just to sit there and be against Obama or be the recipient of an anti-Obama, anti-Democrat vote.  It's a golden opportunity and it has been for a year and a half, and we will see how they utilize it. 
 
(...)

Also in this lame duck, and this is buried in the Alan Simpson, Irksome Bowles debt panel crisis story, they are looking to do away with the mortgage deduction.  They might turn that over to the lame duck Congress.  This is something that only a lame duck Congress could do, only a bunch of guys who have already been defeated who do not have to run for reelection, the only bunch of guys who could do it, that's gonna be the Democrats, so look for that to happen, too. Look also for all of your health benefits to be taxed as income.  I mean everything is on the table, and everything the American left has wanted to tax, which is veritably everything, is gonna be on the table.

(...)

So they win the House, Republicans do.  Then here comes the lame duck session ramming through all of this rotgut that we talked earlier about, then here comes the Alan Simpson/Irksome Bowles debt commission report recommending the end of mortgage interest deductions, a VAT tax, all kinds of new taxes, maybe some spending cuts.

Add to that no improvement in the economy and, voila! Heh-heh-heh! Republicans assume control in January when things are gonna get worse because once January arrives we've got the Obama tax increases associated with health care and the sunset of the Bush tax cuts.  So we have a tsunami, a potential tsunami of disastrous proportions waiting to become reality starting in January 2011, and the Republican Congress would be inaugurated right about the time all this stuff is kicking in, and they would be in power whenever anything and everything starts to get worse.  Obama, as president, will be proposing fixes and solutions and of course will be anything but.  They will be proposals to make things worse.  The Republicans, being who they are, as they should do, will oppose all of it. 

Riding to Obama's rescue will be the media, and the media will say, "He's trying. Poor old Obama. Look what he inherited from Bush.

Read the whole thing at the link....

[Covertness]

I don't see any congress removing the mortgage deduction.

[Talismen]

I've heard this talked about for the past 2 years...it's something obama's people put out there for a "worst case scenario" thing.

They put this out about the time they started talking about confiscating everyone's 401k monies and putting it into a "fund" guaranteed by the govt.

I don't put ANYTHING past them.

[Covertness]

That would hurt every American who owns a house and decrease the demand for home ownership.  All of this is against the left's agenda. 

[Talismen]

Yeah...right.




One word: commune.

[Covertness]

The lefties want everybody to own their own home.  The one thing that motivates the lower middle and upper lower classes to take this leap is the ability to write off a portion of their mortgage on their taxes and get a big check each year from Uncle Sam. 

From a professional stand point, I hope they do eliminate the mortgage deduction.  All that will do is encourage more renters into my Apartment communities.  I'll make more money which will offset any mortgage deduction I'll miss out on. 

[Talismen]

I have to disagree with the 1st portion of your post.

The left pays lip service to "owning your own home", but, accordingly, that home shouldn't be over a certain amount, should be located in a "community" neighborhood, and shouldn't be too big. Now, they may not admit to that, but, their stances and policies speak to those very truths, loudly and clearly.

Soon, they'll say "If you make a certain amount of money, and are in a certain tax bracket, you cannot deduct your mortgage insurance". Or "If you live in a neighborhood with homes valued at XYZ, you cannot deduct your mortgage insurance".

Make book on it.

[Talismen]

This, to me, looks like a back-door route to essentially "getting rid of" the mortgage interest tax deduction. See, I think they'll eventually say "Hey, unless you make under a certain amount of money, you can still deduct your mortgage insurance, but at a reduced percentage". This will drive folks away from the benefits of owning their own home, and will result in fewer people writing off mortgage interest.

Most folks will seek out apartments, townhome rentals and (ugh) homeowner association communities, for their living arrangements.

In essence: Communes.
Carefully planned, carefully watched, carefully crafted,...communes.

That's not the angle Ed goes with in this piece at HotAir, but, it's what I easily see coming down the road, knowing what this administration has done already, and will continue to do:

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/07/21/obama-to-target-cra-social-engineering-in-housinglending-market/

(Make sure to read some of the comments as well. Lots of interesting angles there as well.)

(snips)

Obama to target CRA, social engineering in housing/lending market
posted at 10:55 am on July 21, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

Could it be possible that Barack Obama may dare to go where George Bush and some Republicans wouldn’t in limiting government interventions?  For most of a decade, the US government manipulated lending markets and pressured banks to get mortgages for lower-income families under both the Clinton and Bush administrations, and with Democratic and Republican Congresses.  Now, the Washington Post reports that the Obama administration wants to end the social engineering that created the housing bubble and subsequent collapse as its next target for reform:

Responding to the collapse in home prices and the huge number of foreclosures, the Obama administration is pursuing an overhaul of government policy that could diverge from the emphasis on homeownership embraced by former administrations.

“In previous eras, we haven’t seen people question whether homeownership was the right decision. It was just assumed that’s where you want to go,” said Raphael Bostic, a senior official in the Department of Housing and Urban Development. “You’re not going to hear us say that.”

(...)

The administration’s narrower view of who should own a home and what the government should to do to support them could have major implications for the economy as well as borrowers. Broadly, the administration may wind down some government backing for home loans, but increase the focus on affordable rentals.

Source article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/20/AR2010072005946.html


One comment at HotAir nails it:

Call me paranoid, but I don’t see the real bright light here. They’re going to

increase the focus on affordable rentals

translation: property ownership is bad. This is another step towards devaluing property rights. You will now see the government get involved in rent control to provide affordable housing. Less property taxes will further starve state tax revnue bases, leading to more state dependence on federal largess.

Firefly_76 on July 21, 2010 at 11:21 AM

And this one follows right along:

Are you guys NUTS? You don’t see what this is leading to?
Government ownership of foreclosed homes, the renting them back to lower income.
They are getting into the housing business…they want to control the housing, and eliminate mortgages.
You will rent from the gov., not buy.
The exact opposite of what you are hoping or thinking of.
This is gov. intrusion into the very home…and btw, since they own the home, they become the “king of the castle”.
Man, Ed, you really missed the mark on this one…way off the mark.
The rule is: Nothing from this administration will lead to freedom, or away from the government…nothing.

right2bright on July 21, 2010 at 11:26 AM

[The Gate Keeper]

I think that guy nailed the definition for the rules from this administration:

The rule is: Nothing from this administration will lead to freedom, or away from the government…nothing.

[Talismen]

Yep...I saw that one too.
And he's correct.

This is a "head-fake", and they are betting on the news NOT covering this, in-depth.
What kills me is (as someone points out in the comments @ HotAir)...Why fix CRA, when they all said CRA wasn't responsible for the basis of the meltdown to begin with?

I know for a fact it was, but...just sayin'.

[NosferatusCoffin]

This is part of a long-term strategy of the Left. The ultimate goal is to have the vast bulk of the populace living in large, metropolitan areas, while at the same time, reducing mobility. Whether through higher fuel prices and taxes to reduce said mobility while at the same time trying to force people into short-travel vehicles, such as electric/hybrid cars. The last thing they want is for people to be able to travel freely, without government approval. Sort of a virtual Berlin Wall.

After all, a concentrated population is one that is much easier to control than one that is spread out over a large area. Hence, the Left's disdain and hatred for rural populations.

[Cam]

I would note that the present tax code encourages all sorts of distorting economic choices to benefit select groups.
The FAIR TAX does away with all this INCLUDING the mortgage deduction. So it is not only lefties that want the MID eliminated. The differences is...the fair tax is actually BETTER for homeowners than their present deductions and encourages capital formation and will allow more people to save more quickly to own a home and keep the profits when they sell.
One thing Republicans must do is not simply be the party of NO and REPEAL. We MUST have a well articulated vision for the country of a POSITIVE nature that will get us out of the deep pit that has been dug. One element of such a plan should be the FairTax in my opinion. (not the FLAT tax).
Read here how the Fair Tax would affect homeowners and home buyers.
http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/TheFairTaxTreatmentOfHousing.pdf
If you are new to the concept perhaps a basic overview of the FairTax system is a better place to start.
http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_basics_main

[NosferatusCoffin]

+1000 Cam

The Fair Tax is not only the best way, but really the ONLY way to raise revenues in a both an efficient and fair way.

Granted, that is like garlic to a Democrat vampire. Seeing that the modern-day tax code is the greatest social engineering tool that any politician has ever had, they would rather die then give it up. For it can shape any type of behavior that the political class wants it to. From major things like marriage to the smallest things, like how many recycle bins your business has. And 1,000,000 things in between.

[Talismen]

Cam and Nos nail it! The "Fair Tax" is the way to go.
Trouble is, only one "supposed" candidate (that I'm aware of) is publically saying he'd look at it...And that's huckabee.

Oy.

[Cam]

Tal... my working theory at present is that the Fair Tax would be like a third rail for most candidates to grab hold of right now. It is just too easily distorted in sound bites and demonization by the MSM.
What I believe is that if we elect true fiscal conservatives...and we go into a double dip recession/depression with hyper inflation as I expect...`then the public will be ready to hear about drastic changes to the tax code. And conservatives will be there to provide the solution. We can put Neil Boortz in as Tax Czar!!

[Talismen]

I'm not a huge fan of Boortz, but he has some good points now and then

I agree that it will take a "crisis" to get people to understand how smart of an idea the Fair Tax really is.

[Talismen]

What did I say?

http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/housing/2010-08-11-housing11_cv_N.htm

By Paul Wiseman, USA TODAY
Just how much should Uncle Sam do to help Americans buy their own homes?
For 70 years — and for the last 15 in particular — the answer has been: Whatever it takes.

Now, policymakers are pausing to reconsider. In the next few months, they'll weigh whether there can be too much of a good thing when it comes to helping families finance the American Dream.

The rethink could mean a shake-up for a mortgage market addicted to government subsidies.

"This process of figuring out the government's role is going to involve some hard choices," says Alyssa Katz, author of Our Lot: How Real Estate Came to Own Us. "The moment you start changing the nature of what is guaranteed by the government, what is subsidized, you start to change the alignment of winners and losers. ... We took for granted that anyone could get a mortgage."

Using guarantees and tax breaks, the government pushed homeownership past 69% in 2004. Then it all came crashing down.

Housing prices started crumbling in 2007, panicking financial markets, forcing the government to seize mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and pushing the economy into the worst recession since the 1930s. Homeownership has fallen below 67%.

Now, Washington is preparing to rebuild the national mortgage market atop the ruins of Fannie and Freddie. The proposal, due early next year from the Obama administration, could make it harder to buy a home by reducing available credit or requiring bigger down pay-ments. Low-income renters might get more government help.

Read the rest at the link....

[The Gate Keeper]

Too much government interference and government regulation is what got us into this mess....you would think they would have learned this during this crises and backed off, not offer MORE of the same.....

[Talismen]

That article notes that the goverment "may" help lower income people buy homes, but not anyone else. They'd also require higher down-payments (from everyone but lower income people).

Now, most of the time, folks could save for a few years, relatively easily, to get a decent amount of money for a down payment. But, since we'll all be soon hit by obamacare taxes, and higher costs for food and fuel, plus higher income taxes (with the Bush tax cuts expiring)....We won't have the money to save for a down payment.

Don't think I haven't thought about just finding a nice upper-end apartment and living there, instead of being soaked by yet another tax (property tax) on top of all the other taxes I'll be paying just to "enjoy homeownership".

[diane]

That article notes that the goverment "may" help lower income people buy homes, but not anyone else. They'd also require higher down-payments (from everyone but lower income people).


Isn't that sort of what got us into this mess in the first place with fannie/freddie putting pressure on the banks to make risky loans and their attitude that everyone has the "right" to home ownership.  The "government may help"......this so called government is me and my taxes.  If you have little investment in a down payment, it just makes it easier to walk away from the mortgage

[Talismen]

Well, the house that I'm in now was purchased via a "low down payment" option the homebuilder was running. It was attractive at the time, because it also came with builder-paid closing costs.

But, now, I'm stuck (with my room-mate) owning a home that (had I looked closely enough) is guaranteed by Fannie, but held by a more notable mortgage broker. Granted, I've never missed a payment or been late on a payment, and I always pay more than is necessary. But,...I don't like the idea of Fannie having ANY part of my mortgage, or my home.

[Covertness]

That article notes that the goverment "may" help lower income people buy homes, but not anyone else. They'd also require higher down-payments (from everyone but lower income people).


Isn't that sort of what got us into this mess in the first place with fannie/freddie putting pressure on the banks to make risky loans and their attitude that everyone has the "right" to home ownership.  The "government may help"......this so called government is me and my taxes.  If you have little investment in a down payment, it just makes it easier to walk away from the mortgage

The current administration doesn't care about anybody who can actually afford to own a house.  You might vote Republican but the poor will always vote Democrat.