Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.

Damn, Can't use that one again for at least 4 years.

Rush Limbaugh & "Faux News" pundits blaming it on Obama in 3,2,1...

Well, historically, the stock market drops ~300 points/~4 percent on Inauguration Day, right?

@sebadoh128: I voted Flanders.

OMG! Obama can't save the stock market! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!

Oh, well, by all means, let's impeach the guy right now.

@Gene Gemperline:

To be fair, it's on his list of things to do:

1) Turn water to wine

2) Raise the dead

3) Fix Stock Market

4) Get season pass for 24

I seriously doubt anyone was even paying attention - it might as well have been a national holiday, why was it even open?

It started up this morning, too, but by the time the swearing in came around it was down by almost 200 points.

@Mr.B-Natural_GitEmSteveDave: @se7a7n7: Democrats and leftists in general laying the entire thing directly at Bush's feet despite it being a very complex amalgam of factors that a vast number in the private and government sector collectively share the blame for in 3,2...oh wait, that's been their MO since the whole crisis started...

@acklenheights: Sorry, I goofed and didn't see that I had also replied to you, SteveDave.

@Oranges w/ Cheese: "It started up this morning, too..."

Sigh...no.

DJIA closed at ~8280 on Friday and opened at ~8240.

@se7a7n7: I blame Obama. I also dread the next four years.

Well, there's always pie!

@Gene Gemperline: Sadly, he was going to save the banking industry, but in the process of saving Flight 1549 by guiding it to the water and sharing his ability to walk on water, he saved some BofA employees, which used up the miracle.

D'OH!

@krispykrink: Any waffles?

@se7a7n7: Hey, if everything up until today is Bush's fault (including 9/11, no way it was Clinton's fault right?) then everything from today on is Messiah's fault.

The sharp descent of the European markets yesterday just might have something to do with it.

Of course, unrealistic conservatives will point to this and say, "See! It isn't all Bush's fault". Of course, very few have said it is all Bush's fault, they have tended to think that it is partially Bush's fault, because, of course, it is. I'd throw in some signifigant blame on the Clinton years, but Bush had years to avoid this crisis, rather than worsen it.

@tmed: You're entitled to your opinion, but go read up on Barney Frank and the Fair Housing Act. While you're at it, look at Obama's motions to force banks to lend without doing the proper checks, all in the name of "equality."

Our savior isn't anywhere in the US Government, buddy.

@acklenheights: That's all fine and good, as long as you keep ignoring what the Fair Housing Act did. It required that you offer the same deals to people regardless of color/other protected classes in the same financial shape.

It did NOT say you had to relax your standards, unless your standards were only people of a certain race or ethnicity could get a certain deal. It said you had to use the same standards whether they were white, black, blue or purple.

@Canino: Last I looked, Clinton didnt toss intel estimates showing a certain Bin Laden to be preparing a attack on the US in the garbage to pursue his own agenda. And by toss I mean LITERALLY tossed as in he threw Clintons prepared report on threats to America away.

Nor did he wait till after a attack to pursue him, only to be told by a REPUBLICAN congress to back down as they sold his attack in Afghanistan as a "wag the dog" maneuver.

Face it guys what wasn't Bushes fault directly, was his parties fault. The guy was certainly well meaning, but he was also clueless and surrounded by advisors who cared less about America.

@Jim Topoleski: You are right - Clinton didn't toss the intel estimates. He just prosecuted the first WTC bombing as a state vandalism charge and told the Saudis to let Bin Laden go free.

9/11/01 = Bush
1/20/09+ = B. Hussein Obama

@Canino: Nobody cares that Congress did anything, Bush is a REPUBLICAN, that means it's all his fault as the Democrats can do no wrong. Even though both parties are responsible for this whole thing.

@Charity Froggenhall: YES! LETS! If we can call for impeachment of Bush when he didn't commit a crime because being a terrible president (understatement much?) isn't a crime.

@tmed: Hell, Congress had a big part in all of this, too. But everything in the government is controlled directly by the president, we all know that! Private business, too!

@se7a7n7: I don't know how Fox News could blame Obama, they are already claiming he isn't president because Chief Justice Roberts screwed up the oath.

@Charity Froggenhall: Might as well it would fit with history. Clinton commits no crime and is impeached, while Bush commits a ton of them and is not impeached. So impeaching a democrat for existing would just keep the trend going.

@tmed: Congress has done all the dirty work not clinton and besides the last two years(when it has been 50/50) it's been all republican. The bad things that happened under clinton that he signed, were signed under the assumption further legislation would be made to fill in the gaps. Once Bush took office that never happened. Blaming a democrat for any of it is a huge mistake. The new congress is the first time democrats actually have a majority. If you don't like things in 2 years, only then can you blame them. Hopefully we will get the regulations we need to keep our economy from being ruined by big businesses.

I had my streaming quotes open in a window all day - the market was fine (DOW down about 125-150 points) up until Obama's inauguration. From that point on it pretty much nosedived.

@Oranges w/ Cheese: Just because you weren't paying any attention doesn't mean nobody else was.

@acklenheights:

Maybe you mean The Community Reinvestment Act. That was the true harbinger of the subprime meltdown, in my opinion.

@Con Seannery hates Facebook and Trebek: There's no way you're going to get an opinion out on most popular websites that does anything less than blame Bush for every bad thing ever without getting shouted down by the mob. I'd just stop trying.

@Corporate_guy: really? perjury isn't a crime?

OK. I will wager anyone here that the DJIA will do better during the Obama administration than it did during the Bush years.

DJIA 1/22/2001: 10,659
DJIA 1/16/2009: 8,212

Down 23 percent. Man, Republicans are so bad for the stock market.

@sebadoh128: Jeebus, Faux News is rotting your brain. ONE LAST TIME:

The community reinvestment act said that if everything else was equal, you can't discriminate against someone if they lived in a certain neighborhood or were a certain color. IT DID NOT SAY YOU HAD TO LOAN MONEY TO MINORITIES OR POOR PEOPLE

So a black family who lives on the south side of Chicago, had a credit score of 750 and and makes $75k a year should not be treated any different than a white family who lives in Lincoln Park, Chicago [Ed: a nice neighborhood], with a credit score of 750 and $75k a year in income. That's it. Banks (and right wingers) have spun this to say that they were forced to loan money to minorities, when they were only forced to stop being bigoted.

@acklenheights: That's it. Please cite the statute section that specifically says, "you must loan money to poor people and not do credit checks."

Hint- you won't find it. The law says you can't descriminate against someone because of where they live or what color they are. It doesn't say you must loan money to poor people. So black family in black neighborhood making 100k gets the same deal as white family in white neighborhood, making 100k. That's it.

Banks loaned money to anybody with a pulse because they were greedy and because interest rates were so low, it's like they had free money from the US gov or other banks.

This whole thread is bunch of BS. Like Obama wasn't going to be sworn into power today. This whole thing was a stunt by banks, brokers, traders to remind Obama that they still rule the roost.

@ARP: Or because the European markets sucked when they closed.

@ARP: Or because the economy still sucks and they know Obama can't fix it on one day. He's said that countless times.

@sebadoh128: i voted for Jack Johnson

@acklenheights:

"@tmed: You're entitled to your opinion, but go read up on Barney Frank and the Fair Housing Act. While you're at it, look at Obama's motions to force banks to lend without doing the proper checks, all in the name of "equality."

Our savior isn't anywhere in the US Government, buddy.
"

The Fair Housing Act was a response to blacks WITH THE EXACT SAME EMPLOYMENT AND CREDIT HISTORY not getting the same loans that whites with the exact same employment and credit historty were getting.

I believe it also applied to Federally backed loans, which were what, 15% of this market bubble?

It was just plain greed that screwed the market, it wasn't the fault of poor minorities, and the middle-class are the ones defaulting here.

But of course, you just heard that on Talk Radio and will keep repeating that over and over independent of reality.

@Skiffer: At something like 10:30 this morning it was up at least 80 points. I can't help it you weren't paying attention.

@ARP: You're putting words in my mouth. Go back and read my post and see where I said it was "mandated." And please cite it :)

Barney Frank and his ilk fought against Bush's requests for more oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Franklin Raines, the CEO of Fannie Mae, ran it into the ground while at the same time providing lots of money and advice to Obama.

Barack Obama TRIED via lawsuit to make Citibank give out the same number of loans to African Americans as whites in Chicago.

Here's your citation:

[scottthong.files.wordpress.com]

News for everyone else who might try to pigeonhole me because I'm against liberalism in its current manifestation: I'm disgusted with the US Government as a whole and how it's going against the principles that made America great.

Is this what the Consumerist is coming to? This post is an intentional attempt to troll for comments and has nothing to do with serving the interests of consumers.

Between this and the repeated "shrink ray" posts, I think your writers are having problems finding relevant content. I hope you raise the bar soon.

@ARP:

No need to bring jeebus into this...

There are two CRA's, the one that you just gave us the cliff notes version of, also known as the "theory", and the one that was actually interpreted and used, the one that was "practiced".

The one that was practiced brow beat lenders into making bad loans to make the numbers match. For example, if bank A made 10 loans to a set of people they HAD to make 10 more loans to other people or they risked the hand of "The Man" coming down on them. Now, if you HAD to make ten loans but no one qualified, what do you do? You FUDGE the numbers, you make bad loans.

Now, "The Man" turns a blind eye to this because they don't care, as long as ten underprivileged families got a home who cares, right? Not only do they turn a blind eye, they encourage Fannie and Freddie to buy these loans

Now, banks being the greedy bastards they are see they can get away with this idea of loaning money to anyone with a pulse because no one is manning the store front, because "The Man" only cares about the quantity of loans, not the quality.

Fast forward, the bad loans hit the fan, and here we are. You are right, the CRA nor the Fair Housing act say anything about making bad loans, but you might be the one whose brain is rotting if you can not see that once making loans was reduced to QUANTITY over QUALITY, there was only one place to go.

Theory vs Practice.

@sebadoh128: That's a far better explanation than I could provide, and far better than any exposition you're likely to get from mass media or wingnut communiques.

Those in the government who didn't expose the madness are just as guilty as those who initiated it.

Bravo!

@Corporate_guy: Obama was president for like, four minutes before the oath. What idiots.

@APFPilot: He lied about something insignificant.

"Did you have a muffin this morning, Mr. President?"
"No, I had a bagel."
"LIES!!! WE HAVE IRREFUTABLE PROOF THAT YOU DID IN FACT HAVE A MUFFIN THIS MORNING!! IMPEACH HIM!!"

Let's see here.... cheating on your wife vs. committing war crimes.

@Eric1285: Did it take them by surprise?

@sebadoh128: What a bunch of crap. The thing is the banks never did their homework and entered into agreements that would eventually wreak havoc on the industry or they did their homework and made short-term money-grab that was large enough that the people doing it (not the institutions) didn't have to worry about the destruction later.

The customers did not do their homework and entered contracts that would eventually doom them.

The government did not do its job in helping make the sconomy stable and regulated (mostly through the listen-to-Alan-Greenspan-say-the-market-will-control-itself-rainbows-and-nice-guys policy) making it possible for a few companies willing to make these loans drag everyone else into the business.

Bascially you had a country full of first-time home buyers who enter into loans that they can afford, but barely. So here they are in the first few years of their loan, gaining no equity and waiting for their income to catch up to their loans, the norm, not long ago was for people with steady work to see a gradual inrease in pay through a mechanism caled a "raise". The raises stop coming, earnings go flat, homeowning coasts money, so a year (or two) goes by and they homeowner is still struggling, then Oil prices spike, everything gets more expensive, homeowner is f*cked.

As far as the election: Obama is a better leader than McCain, maybe not 8 years ago, but 8 years ago, McCain doesn't get brow-beaten into taking Palin.