The Bush administration backed off proposed crackdowns on no-money-down, interest-only mortgages years before the economy collapsed, buckling to pressure from some of the same banks that have now failed. It ignored remarkably prescient warnings that foretold the financial meltdown, according to an Associated Press review of regulatory documents.There certainly was some buckling, but to pretend that it was all (or even primarily) on the part of the Administration is laughable. Led by Sen. Dodd, the Democrats blocked the reform being pushed for by the likes of Sen. John McCain. Of course, Dodd's opposition is understandable when you remember that over the last 20 years, he was the Senator most indebted to the very lenders he was allegedly regulating (to the tune of $165k in campaign donations and a couple of sweetheart mortgages that he refuses to disclose records of). How do you write an article about the regulations that got killed by Dems who were paid off by the banks and turn it into a Bush bash? Don't get me wrong, Bush isn't guiltless in this, but you don't even mention Dodd? Has the AP been donating to Dodd's campaign, too?
And then there's this:
The administration's blind eye to the impending crisis is emblematic of a philosophy that trusted market forces and discounted the need for government intervention in the economy.Its belief ironically has ushered in the most massive government intervention since the 1930's.I'm sorry, but I've got to call BS on this one. This knucklehead is going to blame this on conservative economic principles? I mean, do any amount of research beyond reading the Dodd/Frank talking points. Read a Wikipedia article. Anything! But wrong-headed interventionist legislation like the Community Reinvestment Act over the past two decades has more to do with our current position than being let down by "a philosophy that trusted market forces."
More commentary on this article can be found at The Everyday Republican and Say Anything Blog.