Now that Chris Dodd's Bridge sale has failed....




What do we suggest happen to the dissembling Democrat?

The mainstream media acknowledge the probable futility of expecting the toothless Senate Ethics Committee to conduct a serious investigation.

But as we well know, the Senate Democrats are enamored of another form of investigation---the use of the special prosecutor.

So what bothers the Senate Democrats more....whether a few U.S. attorneys got fired for partisan reasons or whether special interests unethically engineered a hundred billion dollar plus raid on taxpayer's funds? 

Ironman has diligently monitored the news wires and blogs. Now certaintly someone selling "hope" and "change" would be expected to sound off on this sort of sleaze, you would think.


Nope. Not a peep. Since Chris Dodd was on the Obama train early, far from calling for an investigation, Senator Barack Obama has maintained radio silence over the entire debacle.

But we've caught ole Hope and change doing the ole bait and switch. Last year he proposed a "radical" mortgage plan so  "Unscrupulous lenders who deceptively sold subprime mortgages to millions of Americans should be fined and the proceeds used to help bail out borrowers facing a wave of foreclosures,"

Obama's description of the villains behind the mortgage meltdown "Mr Obama blamed lobbyists working on behalf of lenders for obstructing tougher regulation of the subprime industry, adding: “Our government failed to provide the regulatory scrutiny that could have prevented this crisis.

“While predatory lenders were driving low-income families into financial ruin, 10 of the country’s largest mortgage lenders were spending more than $185m (€136m, £92m) lobbying Washington to let them get away with it,” he wrote, citing figures from the Centre for Responsive Politics" 

So, is Obama trying to stop those same banking lobbyists from raiding the U.S. Treasury?  Is he demanding his ally Senator Dodd stand down from leading the Banking Committee?

NO. In fact, he's for doing this whole deal yesterday and giving the same people he wanted to fine last year a taxpayer subsidy.

"It's baffling why the White House would oppose a bill that would help so many American families at risk of losing their homes on the same day hundreds of mortgage fraud arrests were announced," said Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee."

Well, Barack, I guess I'm baffled too. How is it that bank lobbyists were evil last year and now when the President questions giving away the store to them, you take the lobbyists side?

Perhaps the Senator could explain why hundreds of mortgage fraud arrests justify giving away billions to the same industry that broke the laws so frequently?

And will we ever find out what was exchanged to make this bill possible? Or are special prosecutors only responsible for the construction of perjury traps for Republican officials?  

Your rating: None