More fuel to add to PC's assertion that Obama has it in hand.

[lildreamer316]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3945674

Hmmm.

[Why Syzygy]

1. How does Obama get the kudos for this?

Didn't the STATES (or NY) bring charges against the "Bush administration"?
It HELPS Obama, but I'm lost when trying to give him credit for it.

"In a rebuke of the Bush administration, the Supreme Court ruled Monday that a federal bank regulator erred in quashing efforts by New York state to combat the kind of predatory mortgage lending that triggered the nation's financial crisis. (...)"

[Why Syzygy]

2. In fact ... !!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3945376&mesg_id=3945429
Eric J in MN (1000+ posts) Mon Jun-29-09 07:32 PM
Response to Original message
10. The Obama Administration took the same position as the Bush Administration.

Maybe Antonin Scalia felt he was rebuking Obama.

=======================================================================================================================================================
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aCd...

Obama Backs Banks, Seeks to Block Fair-Lending Probe

By Greg Stohr

March 26 (Bloomberg) -- The Obama administration’s call for greater financial regulation may have its limits.

The administration late yesterday urged the U.S. Supreme Court to bar New York and other states from enforcing their
fair-lending and other consumer-protection laws against federally chartered banks including JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Wells Fargo & Co.

The legal brief, which adopts the Bush administration’s position, is a setback for consumer and civil-rights groups that had urged
President Barack Obama’s team to switch positions.
=======================================================================================================================================================

[northernlights]

3. thanks for finding that, WS

I was sure I'd read that Obama was against allowing the states to regulate.

I wonder if Scalia lost money? In any event, old-time conservatives are strong on state's rights versus more central power.

I must say I am glad Obama lost on this one. It is an outrage that the existing regulatory agencies failed to do their jobs, and a further outrage that the states were then prevented from protecting us.

[get the red out]

4. Maybe the greater good had this one in hand

:hi:

On Scalia, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

[lildreamer316]

5. ....my point exactly.

If most of us generally go with what PC is saying, then sometimes Obama has to lose to win. Or he has to manipulate things to make it look like the other side has the upper hand, while laying in place seeds for their destruction. I speak more of him being the obvious front of the Light - maybe not having a traceable, direct hand in a particular thing, but that it all works synergistically together to uncover corruption and allow the right mechanisms to fall into place.

[Psychic Consortium]

7. This is exactly correct. nt

[Why Syzygy]

8. Big "if" ...

[northernlights]

6. agreed

:D