"Regulation Caused the Subprime Crisis"

The myth goes something like this: "The gubment made dem banks lend'ta minawratas, an' we'all know dey can't pay no goddamm bills"

 Of course the data shows that this is all a ruse by the race-baiting anti-regulation propagandists.  The report on the subprime crisis done by the Federal Reserve Board of Dallas shows that:

"No major changes have been made to the CRA or its enforcement since 1995. The subprime crisis was triggered by poorly performing mortgage loans originated between 2004 and 2007. This chronological gap weakens the contention that the CRA is a major cause of the crisis.
Contrary to the widely held perception that most higher-priced loans were made to lower-income groups targeted by the CRA, 55 percent of higher-priced loan originations went to middle- and upper-income borrowers or borrowers in middle- and upper-income neighborhoods in 2005 and 2006.
Only 6 percent of higher-priced loan originations made by banking institutions and their affiliates in 2005 and 2006 went to lower-income borrowers or borrowers in lower-income neighborhoods within CRA assessment areas"



and further:

"Mortgage purchase data counter the notion that the CRA indirectly created an incentive for independent mortgage companies to make higher-priced lower-income loans. In 2006, banking institutions bought only about 9 percent of independent mortgage companies’ loans; 15 percent of those loans were higher-priced loans to lower-income borrowers or neighborhoods"

rather, the report concludes:

"There appears to be a direct correlation between the quality of subprime loans and the degree of regulatory oversight. Nondepository mortgage providers such as mortgage lenders and brokers are regulated by 50 different state banking supervisors instead of a federal body responsible for comprehensive oversight. Comptroller of the Currency John Dugan reported that these companies 'originated the overwhelming preponderance of toxic subprime mortgages' and these loans 'account for a disproportionate percentage of defaults and foreclosures nationwide, with glaring examples in the metropolitan areas hardest hit by the foreclosure crisis.' "

It would seem that the most obvious (if not the most classist, racist, and what have you) conclusion bears out; that the crisis was not caused by governance, but rather a lack of governance

http://dallasfed.org/ca/bcp/2009/bcp0901.cfm

"Hate Crime = Thought Crime"

The argument that distinguishing between common crimes and hate crimes is a method of policing thought-crime would seem a most cynical ploy by those who wish to defend bigoted belligerence.  Long before Orwell, legal distinctions distinctions were made upon crimes based upon intent.  Even the ancient Law of Moses made the distinction between accidental manslaughter and murder, and provided means by which one who committed the former could take refuge from vengeance.  As civil law entered the modern age, new terms of distinction such as "malice aforethought," "premeditated murder," and "aggravated murder" entered the legal as well as the common vernacular.  The notion that criminal law ought to take notice of actions only is to ignore the history of jurisprudence.

Sex Ed for Every Kindergartener

I was recently shown a video off of youtube

http://youtu.be/DNqyt2vac4E

 It details how the author believes that Barack Obama believes that every Kindergartener should have sex ed, and how the author postulates that the president lied about the bill being intended to protect children from sexual predators based exclusively on the author's inability to read/use search a document.  It took me about 10 minutes to find the references to protecting children.  wow.  Here is my response to the person who posted the propaganda:


firstly, the bill does not mandate that EVERY kindergarten teach sex-ed. It only sets guidelines for school districts that decide to do so.



the first line of the bill text reads: "No pupil shall be required to take or participate in any class or course in comprehensive sex education if the pupil's parent or guardian submits written objection thereto, and refusal to take or participate in such course or program shall not be reason for suspension or expulsion of such pupil."

the bill also does state: "Course material and instruction shall advise pupils that it is unlawful for males or females of any age to engage in sexual conduct or have sexual relations with a minor as specified in... Article 12 of the Criminal Code of 1961"

as well as:

"Course material and instruction shall teach pupils to not make unwanted physical and verbal sexual advances and how to say no to unwanted sexual advances and shall include information about verbal, physical, and visual sexual harassment, including without limitation nonconsensual sexual advances, nonconsensual physical sexual contact, and rape by an acquaintance. The course material and instruction shall contain methods of preventing sexual assault by an acquaintance, including exercising good judgment and avoiding behavior that impairs one's judgment. The course material and instruction shall emphasize personal accountability and respect for others and shall also encourage youth to resist negative peer pressure. The course material and instruction shall inform pupils of the potential legal consequences of sexual assault by an acquaintance. Specifically, pupils shall be advised that it is unlawful to touch an intimate part of another person as specified in the Criminal Code of 1961.
(12) Course material and instruction shall teach male pupils about male accountability for sexual violence and shall teach female students about reducing vulnerability for sexual violence.
(13) Course material and instruction shall teach pupils about counseling, medical, and legal resources available to survivors of sexual abuse and sexual assault, including resources for escaping violent relationships.
(14) Course material and instruction shall teach pupils that it is wrong to take advantage of or to exploit another person.
(15) Course material and instruction shall be free of racial, ethnic, gender, religious, or sexual orientation biases."

So I bet I can guess which line was ACTUALLY outrageous to the maker of that video. Anyone else have a guess?


http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/fulltext.asp?DocName=09300SB0099&GA=93&SessionId=3&DocTypeId=SB&LegID=73&DocNum=99&GAID=3&Session;=

and Article 12 of the Illinois Criminal Code

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs4.asp?DocName=072000050HArt.+12,+Subdiv.+5&ActID=1876&ChapterID=53&SeqStart=20887500&SeqEnd=22225000