by Victor Love

Created on: December 13, 2010   Last Updated: December 14, 2010

Please clarify the question or a part thereof, when asked to respond to an open-ended question such as " did campaign contributions...?"

Did my campaign contribution pollute my elected officials decision(s) on pending legislation? Does a drop of water have a ripple effect on the oceans, does it change the Ph of the water? The acidity? The feeding patterns of  aquatic or plant life? Doubtful.

Conversely, what happens when a bucket of tainted water is poured over my one droplet of purified water? It becomes assimilated into the mass of water so as to be indiscernible from the tainted water.  Given that, then my answer would be probably.

As the old saying goes, "too much of one thing can never be good for you"!  When you have a mid term election that had politicians and their challengers spending over $500 million dollars in totality to get or stay elected, then questions have to be raised. Most of that money came from a handful of party supporters for Republicans. Dems had big spenders as well but the majority of donations came from the working class.  But I digress, on to the topic!

The answer is not to blame those homeowners in over their head, nor the banks or lending institutions or the investment banks and their derivatives market. These are simply people and institutions who took advantage of existing laws and business practices that proved to be the wrong move for most involved.

The real blame for this mess lies with New York. WHAT? You heard me loud and clear, NEW YORK! They decided in their infinite wisdom, and probably promises of wealth from Wall st., to exempt "certain Wall st. practices" from being regulated by the New York Gambling Authority. In my mind, exemptions aren't given to companies who don't have to "cross the line". Clearly New York  had issues with certain activities on Wall st. and with the investment banks.  Therefore, New York had to issue an exemption and in doing so saw either a benefit to the state or the city or both.  In essence, they took down the protective fence surrounding the hen house, and once the wolves realized there was no "invisible fence" there to shock them, a feeding frenzy ensued that just about cannibalized this nations working class! 

Without an exemption:

There would have been very few "mortgage backed securities" to shop around, with the electric fence in place the wolves would get astray now and then, only to offer up lame apologies and justifications

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>