The nature of the problem

According to the poster on Free Republic, this video was taken down by YouTube. It is being routed through Canada so now it can be seen (for now).

The nature of our problems is that you can't get any truth out there. Since the economic crisis began in 2007, the bad economy has been a millstone around George W. Bush's neck. But is that an accurate charge? Is what we hear from the accepted sources accurate, or has it been corrupted? And is the corruption suppressing the truth?

You have the left arguing that the two Bush wars took down the economy, but on the other hand, you got Paul Krugman wishing for a war to bring the economy back. Well, which way is it? Are wars good or bad for the economy?

Intellectual dishonesty has become the new standard, which has been appropriated by the Democrats. They keep blaming private enterprise for a problem that had its genesis in one of their own favorite programs, as this video shows. And it appears that the truth of this is getting suppressed by a refusal to discuss causes and effects, which this video points to. The truth doesn't favor the left, but that doesn't matter as long as they have control over the media.

The financial crisis started with a freezing of the credit markets. This was caused by too lax lending standards, and a practice of spreading out the risk amongst the many. The trouble is that, once that the mortgage problem became severe enough, no one really knew where the trouble was. Lenders stopped trusting borrowers, and the wheels of commerce came to a halt. That continues to this very day. If anything, it is now worse, as the government's own credit reputation has now been downgraded.

The political connection cannot be clearer.

In 2008, Obama ignored the spending limits put in place during the Watergate years. During that time, money was seen as a corrupting influence upon politics. So, why wasn't that the case in 2008? This coming election cycle promises the same, with the Obama machine ready to destroy any opponent who emerges from the contenders amongst the Republicans. If money is power, and power corrupts, then the system is now corrupted. The corruption cannot stand the light of truth be shined upon it. It will attempt to drown out any other message that emerges with a tsunami of money.

The nature of the problem is the incestuous relationship between the media and the Democrat party. This extends into the corporate world as well, amongst the biggest players in the Democrat fold- such as Soros and Buffett. The political field is being shaped by their influence, but should it continue? If so, towards what end? If not, then how to change that?