Foreclosure Problems Under the Radar

With the immigration debate heated and swinging to and fro, another issue has been playing second fiddle.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/money/51795049-79/law-state-utah-bank.html.csp

The issue of how banks treat foreclosures.

The new law allows homeowners who were illegally foreclosed on to go to court to seek payment of damages, penalties of up to $2,000 and legal fees. The Utah Attorney General’s Office asserts that ReconTrust, the foreclosure arm of Bank of America, fails to comply with state law when it institutes foreclosure proceedings under its own name.

BoA will continue to reap their millions of dollars and maintain their position on foreclosures. They believe ReconTrust is governed by federal banking laws and not state law.

Goodbye (not) Osama

Good riddance.

What an electric story, the most incredible Sunday night in recent memory. Not only was the news incredible, but the sensational story of the 'how' was equally wild.

Although I have to take the media reports of the video game style raid with a grain of salt, I'm quite confident that we got our man. I'm not sorry int he elast and sense this is a massive turning point for American culture. Everything changed that fateful day almost 10 years ago. But now there's a sense of closure.

I wouldn't say victory is going to arrive sooner, but you do get the sense that this blow could be severe to terrorism.

Will it stop? No.

If Pizza Hut can run a franchise so can a terrorist group. And their functionality will continue long after the death of their leader, who in recent times has become more symbolic than active.

What comes next will be interesting. Americans ahve a renewed sense of optimism about their country, and about the prospects of the war on terror. The enemy probably will gear up for some type of response, retaliating in equally brutal fashion as we demonstrated on their #1.

Let's turn the corner. Our Nation is great, and we can use this watershed moment to drive us out of the funk we're stuck in.

Expectations of social media and law

BIn Laden is dead.

And yet again, the major news outlets didn't break the news first.

People around the Pakistan area where the raid was going down were the first to report the event. They didn't nkow they were covering via Twitter, but the information was there.

THen the news came to America, and somehow a former Bush advisor got word Osama was killed. Who told him I don't know, but it's a demonstration of the intricate game of telephone that goes down when some incredible news emerges.

But then what happens when that news 'leaks'? We want to charge Wikileaks for the potential consequences of leaking sensitive documents. But what about a stupid Bush aid who 'leaks' info about the Bin Laden death on Twitter?

He was the initial source that major news outlets used.

Two things

a) I wonder if there's a consequence for tweeting; the law certainly hasn't caught up in many respects to th enature of social media.

b) How much of the story, the sensationalized story, can we trust?

Either way, one thing is for sure, the world is certainly a safer place now that we've rid ourselves of the parasite who essentially despised humanity as a fundamental level.