Another Record!… Bank Failures Skyrocket During Obama’s Watch (McCain, statistics)

[jt800]

Bank failures skyrocketed during Obama’s watch.

484 banks have failed since 2000.

58 of the bank failures occured before January 2009.

428 occured during Barack Obama’s administration.

92 banks went under in 2011. 157 banks failed in 2010 and 140 banks failed in 2009.



This is the highest number since the early 90′s.


For some reason the media has ignored this devastating news.

[AeroGuyDC]

Another one of those damning statistics that Obama would like to pin on George W. Bush. Fortunately, his latest campaign snafu of asserting that Romney is a felon pretty much pre-empts the President from being able to making anymore false accusations. One more major desperation move might very well sink this President. Most people see right through him.

[Finn_Jarber]

Originally Posted by jt800

Bank failures skyrocketed during Obama’s watch.

484 banks have failed since 2000.

58 of the bank failures occured before January 2009.

428 occured during Barack Obama’s administration.

92 banks went under in 2011. 157 banks failed in 2010 and 140 banks failed in 2009.



This is the highest number since the early 90′s.


For some reason the media has ignored this devastating news.

Too bad Bush was not around to bail them out

Personally I believe that failed corporations should be allowed to go under, but apparently the far-right is in disagreement about this.

[Taratova]

More foreclosures coming. It is not good and this nation is in trouble while Obama plays politics, throws money away on his green agenda, and pushes another money eating entity called Obamacare with a huge tax increase on the people.. Obama needs to go!

[HappyTexan]

For crying out loud..it wouldn't matter WHO the President was those failures were going to happen anyway.

You think the world revolves around the Oval Office and who sits there ?
You think they would have ALL been avoided if McCain was in there ?

Those banks were going under regardless.

[Finn_Jarber]

Originally Posted by HappyTexan

For crying out loud..it wouldn't matter WHO the President was those failures were going to happen anyway.

No, not if someone had bailed them out.

[HappyTexan]

Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber

No, not if someone had bailed them out.

You can't bail out everyone. The bad ones failed. It's called trimming the fat.
The FDIC did it's job though and people did not lose their money.

[pknopp]

Allowing banks to fail is not the problem. Not allowing them to fail when they screw up is the problem.

[jt800]

Originally Posted by HappyTexan

For crying out loud..it wouldn't matter WHO the President was those failures were going to happen anyway.

You think the world revolves around the Oval Office and who sits there ?
You think they would have ALL been avoided if McCain was in there ?

Those banks were going under regardless.

You make that statement with absolute certainty even though it is not certain at all how many would have failed anyhow.

McCain may well have gotten this Country back on it's feet (I'm almost positive he would have) way quicker than clueless Obama has and therefore, perhaps only 30% of those would have failed.

There is of course no way of knowing that...and that's why no one can say it with such certainty.

[summers73]

These banks must not be contributing to Obama's campaign.