Jump to content

Democrats WERE responsible for the 2008 Financial Crisis


Recommended Posts

Democrats LOVE to blame George Bush for the Financial meltdown that occurred in 2008, BUT the TRUTH is that Democrats were VERY much involved, and responsible, for allowing it to happen… The Liberal media never reported it (which is another reason most INFORMED people don’t trust the “Liberal Media”)… This subject came up in another thread, but I thought it DESERVED it’s OWN discussion… so...

 

The "sub Prime" loans meltdown occurred, because loans were made to people who couldn't afford them... BUT, DO YOU KNOW that it was Bill Clinton who got THAT ball rolling in 2008?... He sued the major banks and WON a Huge settlement ( $2.1 Billion... a lot of money in 1998)... He FORCED the banks to make loans they didn't really want to make, and evidently made assurances to them against any losses (too big to fail)... Anderew Cuomo (HUD secretary under Bill Clinton) announced the lawsuit victory… Here is a You-tube video of that announcement... if you listen to the end, you'll hear that he was ASKED about potential defaults & loan failures… but he just pu-pu’d it….

 

 

I will not argue that the banks and S&L's went to far as well, and had a hand in the crisis... but George Bush's fault? He actually tried to WARN congress of the impending crisis (possible crisis at the time)… starting in 2001, and tried until 2005... but the DEMOCRATS called the experts who came in to testify about it EVERY name in the book, and effectively BLOCKED any reform... The Bush administration, and MANY Republicans had it RIGHT… they tried to warn Congress, and the Democrats that Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac (who financed ALL those loans) were too big and needed to be reformed... BUT, the Democrats WOULD NOT LISTEN

THESE Youtube videos detail it… the first in a timeline, and the second actually showing Democrats ATTACKING the men who cam to testify… there are DOZENS of other videos as well...

 

 

 

SO, what do you Democrats think about this? You have blamed George Bush for YEARS… did you KNOW that the Democrats were involved, right up to their EARS? What do you think about the Democrat LIES in blaming ONLY George Bush, and NEVER blaming themselves for the crisis?… What do you think about the “Mains Stream Media” that tried VERY HARD to NEVER report on the Democrat involvement, OR the Republican efforts to avert the crisis?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 106
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I pity the next guy (or gal), who has to inherit Obama's mess.

How old are you? Look at your post....Do you live in a cave or something? My God a first grader has more insight than you.

repukes were in total control of the govt from

2000 to 2006. (That was after the 1990s.)

repukes moved 50,000 US factories and 20,000,000

jobs to asia during that time. That caused men to

lose jobs, their homes (collapse of the real estate

market).

 

repukes allowed wall street brokers and bankers and

aig to gamble with investors' money. They dropped

the DOW from 14,400 with Dems and Clinton to 6,500.

 

repukes took Bill Clinton's balanced budget and surplus

and gave tax cuts to the rich while repukes started two

fraudulent wars so cheney and bush and their buddies could

steal trillions of tax dollars.

 

If you believe any of the crap repukes are shoveling down

your willing neck, You can also buy my deed to the Brooklyn

bridge, you fugging moron. Now you know why this country

is in such a mess with such a bunch of LYING, STEALING

corrupt repukes in power put there by gullible, stupid ass holes

like their moron supporters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Democrats LOVE to blame George Bush for the Financial meltdown that occurred in 2008, BUT the TRUTH is that Democrats were VERY much involved, and responsible, for allowing it to happen… The Liberal media never reported it (which is another reason most INFORMED people don’t trust the “Liberal Media”)… This subject came up in another thread, but I thought it DESERVED it’s OWN discussion

 

Mostly correct, but Bush's lax Fed monetary policy, supported by members of both parties, played a strong secondary role.

 

And yes, had Dems not obstructed Bush's 13 attempts to reform Fannie Mae, the worst of the Financial Freeze would have been prevented.

Link to post
Share on other sites

repukes were in total control of the govt from

2000 to 2006. (That was after the 1990s.)

repukes moved 50,000 US factories and 20,000,000

jobs to asia during that time. That caused men to

lose jobs, their homes (collapse of the real estate

market).

 

repukes allowed wall street brokers and bankers and

aig to gamble with investors' money. They dropped

the DOW from 14,400 with Dems and Clinton to 6,500.

 

repukes took Bill Clinton's balanced budget and surplus

and gave tax cuts to the rich while repukes started two

fraudulent wars so cheney and bush and their buddies could

steal trillions of tax dollars.

 

If you believe any of the crap repukes are shoveling down

your willing neck, You can also buy my deed to the Brooklyn

bridge, you fugging moron. Now you know why this country

is in such a mess with such a bunch of LYING, STEALING

corrupt repukes in power put there by gullible, stupid ass holes

like their moron supporters.

ROTFLMFAO

WOW, and all that from someone with the mentality of a third-grader!!

Go play in the school yard while the adults solve the problem. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

repukes were in total control of the govt from

2000 to 2006. (That was after the 1990s.)

repukes moved 50,000 US factories and 20,000,000

jobs to asia during that time. That caused men to

lose jobs, their homes (collapse of the real estate

market).

 

repukes allowed wall street brokers and bankers and

aig to gamble with investors' money. They dropped

the DOW from 14,400 with Dems and Clinton to 6,500.

 

repukes took Bill Clinton's balanced budget and surplus

and gave tax cuts to the rich while repukes started two

fraudulent wars so cheney and bush and their buddies could

steal trillions of tax dollars.

 

If you believe any of the crap repukes are shoveling down

your willing neck, You can also buy my deed to the Brooklyn

bridge, you fugging moron. Now you know why this country

is in such a mess with such a bunch of LYING, STEALING

corrupt repukes in power put there by gullible, stupid ass holes

like their moron supporters.

Wow! I never knew I was a speed-reader until you came along. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

repukes were in total control of the govt from

2000 to 2006. (That was after the 1990s.)

repukes moved 50,000 US factories and 20,000,000

jobs to asia during that time. That caused men to

lose jobs, their homes (collapse of the real estate

market).

 

repukes allowed wall street brokers and bankers and

aig to gamble with investors' money. They dropped

the DOW from 14,400 with Dems and Clinton to 6,500.

 

repukes took Bill Clinton's balanced budget and surplus

and gave tax cuts to the rich while repukes started two

fraudulent wars so cheney and bush and their buddies could

steal trillions of tax dollars.

 

If you believe any of the crap repukes are shoveling down

your willing neck, You can also buy my deed to the Brooklyn

bridge, you fugging moron. Now you know why this country

is in such a mess with such a bunch of LYING, STEALING

corrupt repukes in power put there by gullible, stupid ass holes

like their moron supporters.

 

 

Thought we were discussing the Democrats involvement in the 2008 Financial Crisis... you know, the one that they like to blame Georeg Bush for, but which THEY were involved up to their eyeball in as well.... You know... THAT ONE...

 

Mostly correct, but Bush's lax Fed monetary policy, supported by members of both parties, played a strong secondary role.

 

And yes, had Dems not obstructed Bush's 13 attempts to reform Fannie Mae, the worst of the Financial Freeze would have been prevented.

 

I can't argue with THAT... you are correct... George Bush could have, and should have done more as well... NO DOUBT. But Dems LOVE to pretend they had no part in it... and I wanted to set the record straight...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Democrats LOVE to blame George Bush for the Financial meltdown that occurred in 2008, BUT the TRUTH is that Democrats were VERY much involved, and responsible, for allowing it to happen… The Liberal media never reported it (which is another reason most INFORMED people don’t trust the “Liberal Media”)… This subject came up in another thread, but I thought it DESERVED it’s OWN discussion… so...

 

The "sub Prime" loans meltdown occurred, because loans were made to people who couldn't afford them... BUT, DO YOU KNOW that it was Bill Clinton who got THAT ball rolling in 2008?... He sued the major banks and WON a Huge settlement ( $2.1 Billion... a lot of money in 1998)... He FORCED the banks to make loans they didn't really want to make, and evidently made assurances to them against any losses (too big to fail)... Anderew Cuomo (HUD secretary under Bill Clinton) announced the lawsuit victory… Here is a You-tube video of that announcement... if you listen to the end, you'll hear that he was ASKED about potential defaults & loan failures… but he just pu-pu’d it….

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr1M1T2Y314&list=PLE489FE854E079C3E

 

I will not argue that the banks and S&L's went to far as well, and had a hand in the crisis... but George Bush's fault? He actually tried to WARN congress of the impending crisis (possible crisis at the time)… starting in 2001, and tried until 2005... but the DEMOCRATS called the experts who came in to testify about it EVERY name in the book, and effectively BLOCKED any reform... The Bush administration, and MANY Republicans had it RIGHT… they tried to warn Congress, and the Democrats that Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac (who financed ALL those loans) were too big and needed to be reformed... BUT, the Democrats WOULD NOT LISTEN

THESE Youtube videos detail it… the first in a timeline, and the second actually showing Democrats ATTACKING the men who cam to testify… there are DOZENS of other videos as well...

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPSDnGMzIdo

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyqYY72PeRM

 

SO, what do you Democrats think about this? You have blamed George Bush for YEARS… did you KNOW that the Democrats were involved, right up to their EARS? What do you think about the Democrat LIES in blaming ONLY George Bush, and NEVER blaming themselves for the crisis?… What do you think about the “Mains Stream Media” that tried VERY HARD to NEVER report on the Democrat involvement, OR the Republican efforts to avert the crisis?

Silly man, you cannot blame the democrats. They lack "humility". Well, they could have "humility" but if they do, it is greatly overshadowed by their arrogance and hypocrisy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

democrats were responsible for the meltdown nuff said.

 

Well, THAT would no be true or accurate either... and I'm all about FACTS and TRUTH..

 

The truth is that there were a LOT of people who were involved... BUT, the Democrats were in it UP TO THEIR EARS also... and for them to LIE about it, and the Liberal media to Perpetuate the lie by NOT reporting the FACTS... nausiates me.

 

People need to understand whatREALLY happened, and Democrats need to take their share of responibility...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bush tried dems failed

2001

  • April: The Administration's FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is "a potential problem," because "financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity." (2002 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 142)

2002

  • May: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in the President's 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)

2003

  • February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market.

  • September: Then-Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact "legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises" and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.


  • September: Then-House Financial Services Committee Ranking Member Barney Frank (D-MA) strongly disagrees with the Administration's assessment, saying "these two entities – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – are not facing any kind of financial crisis … The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing." (Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," The New York Times, 9/11/03)


  • October: Senator Thomas Carper (D-DE) refuses to acknowledge any necessity for GSE reforms, saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." (Sen. Carper, Hearing of Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, 10/16/03)


  • November: Then-Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any "legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk." To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have "broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards" and "receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)

2004

  • February: The President's FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital and calls for creation of a new, world-class regulator: "The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore … should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator." (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)

  • February: Then-CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to "not take [the financial market's] strength for granted." Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by "ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, "Keeping Fannie And Freddie's House In Order," Financial Times, 2/24/04)


  • April: Rep. Frank ignores the warnings, accusing the Administration of creating an "artificial issue." At a speech to the Mortgage Bankers Association conference, Rep. Frank said "people tend to pay their mortgages. I don't think we are in any remote danger here. This focus on receivership, I think, is intended to create fears that aren't there." ("Frank: GSE Failure A Phony Issue," American Banker, 4/21/04)


  • June: Then-Treasury Deputy Secretary Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and calls for reform, saying "We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System." (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)

2005

  • April: Then-Secretary Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying "Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America … Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system." (Secretary John W. Snow, "Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee," 4/13/05)

  • July: Then-Minority Leader Harry Reid rejects legislation reforming GSEs, "while I favor improving oversight by our federal housing regulators to ensure safety and soundness, we cannot pass legislation that could limit Americans from owning homes and potentially harm our economy in the process." ("Dems Rip New Fannie Mae Regulatory Measure," United Press International, 7/28/05)

2007

  • August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying "first things first when it comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options." (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, the White House, 8/9/07)

  • August: Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd ignores the President's warnings and calls on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position. (Eric Dash, "Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," The New York Times, 8/11/07)


  • December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying "These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I've called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon." (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, the White House, 12/6/07)

2008

  • February: Assistant Treasury Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, saying "A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully." (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)

  • March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and "move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages." (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)


  • April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation and "modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)


  • May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further.
    • "Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes. Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow state housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08)


    • "[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their homes. And one way we can do that – and Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)


    • "Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)

  • June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying "we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac." (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)


  • July: Congress heeds the President's call for action and passes reform legislation for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.


  • September: Democrats in Congress forget their previous objections to GSE reforms, as Senator Doddquestions "why weren't we doing more, why did we wait almost a year before there were any significant steps taken to try to deal with this problem? … I have a lot of questions about where was the administration over the last eight years." (Dawn Kopecki, "Fannie Mae, Freddie 'House Of Cards' Prompts Takeover," Bloomberg, 9/9/08)
Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't the American people deserve to know that Democrat Barney Frank, then ranking member and now chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said, " I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation towards subsidized housing"? Isn't the fact that the ranking Democrat in charge of oversight of Fannie Mae was in a sexual relationship with a high-ranking Fannie Mae executive a glaring conflict of interest? Isn't it worth noting that Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters insisted, "we do not have a crisis at Freddie Mac, and in particular at Fannie Mae, under the outstanding leadership of Mr. Frank Raines"? Shouldn't the American people know that Democratic Rep. Gregory Meeks insist that "there's been nothing that was indicated that's wrong with Fannie Mae"?


If nothing else, shouldn't we salute Democratic Rep. Artur Davis for saying, "Like a lot of my Democratic colleagues I was too slow to appreciate the recklessness of Fannie and Freddie. I defended their efforts to encourage affordable homeownership when in retrospect I should have heeded the concerns raised by their regulator in 2004. Frankly, I wish my Democratic colleagues would admit when it comes to Fannie and Freddie, we were wrong."


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bush was the boss and had control over the government and failed. Nuff said.

Bush didn't get the job done. blaming democrats for what bush did does nothing.

 

So, WAIT A SECOND...

 

"Bush was the BOSS, and so Bush was responsible...

 

BUT, OBAMA has been "BOSS" for almost SIX YEARS, and according to Democrats, EVERYTHING that Obama has screwed up is "George Bushs Fault"?

 

THIS is why Liberals are so hard to take seriously... they are arrogant to an EXTREME... and without the results to actually "Back Up" the arrogance...

 

1) They believe in freedom of speach, except when someone disagrees with them.. then they want to silence them (Fox News)

 

2) They are against racism and become irate when anyone even mis speaks a racial slur... except when it is a Democrat who slurs omne race or anther (Biden, Emanual, Jackson and others)

 

3) They are against the abuse of women in any form (i.e rape and abusre) , except when one of THEIR poleticians who is guilty (Clinton among others).

 

4) AND they believe that the President is the BOSS, and is resposible for what goes on under his watch... EXCEPT when it's Barak Obama... he's not responsible for ANYTHING... and he'll TELL you so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mythmaking is in full swing as the Bush administration prepares to leave town. Among the more prominent is the assertion that the housing meltdown resulted from unbridled capitalism under a president opposed to all regulation.

AP

Like most myths, this is entertaining but fictional. In reality, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were among the principal culprits of the housing crisis, and Mr. Bush wanted to rein them in before things got out of hand. Rather than a failure of capitalism, the housing meltdown shows what's likely to happen when government grants special privileges to favored private entities that facilitate bad actors and lousy practices.

Fannie and Freddie are "government-sponsored enterprises" (GSEs), chartered by Congress. As such, they had an implicit promise of taxpayer backing and could borrow money at rates well below competitors. Because of this, the Bush administration warned in the budget it issued in April 2001 that Fannie and Freddie were too large and overleveraged. Their failure "could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting federally insured entities and economic activity" well beyond housing. Mr. Bush wanted to limit systemic risk by raising the GSEs' capital requirements, compelling preapproval of new activities, and limiting the size of their portfolios. Why should government regulate banks, credit unions and savings and loans, but not GSEs? Mr. Bush wanted the GSEs to be treated just like their private-sector competitors. But the GSEs fought back. They didn't want to see the Bush reforms enacted, because that would level the playing field for their competitors. Congress finally did pass the Bush reforms, but in 2008, after Fannie and Freddie collapsed. The largely unreported story is that to fend off regulation, the GSEs engaged in a lobbying frenzy. They hired high-profile Democrats and Republicans and spent $170 million on lobbying over the past decade. They also constructed an elaborate network of state and local lobbyists to pressure members of Congress. When Republican Richard Shelby of Alabama, then chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, pushed for comprehensive GSE reform in 2005, Democrat Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut successfully threatened a filibuster. Later, after Fannie and Freddie collapsed, Mr. Dodd asked, "Why weren't we doing more?" He then voted for the Bush reforms that he once called "ill-advised." But Mr. Dodd wasn't the only Democrat to heap abuse on the Bush reforms. Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts defended Fannie and Freddie as "fundamentally sound" and labeled the president's proposals as "inane." He later voted for the reforms. Sen. Charles Schumer of New York dismissed Mr. Bush's "safety and soundness concerns" as "a straw man." "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," was the helpful advice of both Sen. Thomas Carper of Delaware and Rep. Maxine Waters of California. Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York berated a Bush official at a hearing, saying, "I am just pissed off" at the administration for raising the issue. Democrats had ready allies among lenders accustomed to GSEs buying their risky mortgages. For example, Angelo Mozilo, CEO of Countrywide Financial, complained that "an overly cumbersome regulatory process" would "reduce, or even eliminate, the incentives for the GSEs and their primary market partners." It took Fannie and Freddie over three decades to acquire $2 trillion in mortgages and mortgage-backed securities. Together, they held $2.1 trillion in 2000. By 2005, the two GSEs held $4 trillion, up 92% in just five years. By 2008, they'd grown another 24%, to nearly $5 trillion. They held almost half of all American mortgages. The more the president pushed for reform, the more they bought. Peter Wallison of the American Enterprise Institute and Charles Calomiris of the Columbia Business School suggest $1 trillion of this debt was subprime and "liar loans," almost all bought between 2005 and 2007. This bulk-up in risky paper made it possible for banks to lend imprudently on a massive scale. Some critics blame Mr. Bush because he supported broadening homeownership. But Mr. Bush's goal was for people to own homes they could afford, not ones made accessible by reckless lenders who off-loaded their risk to GSEs. The housing meltdown is largely a story of greed and irresponsibility made possible by government privilege. If Democrats had granted the Bush administration the regulatory powers it sought, the housing crisis wouldn't be nearly as severe and the economy as a whole would be better off. That's why some mythmakers are so intent on denying that Mr. Bush worked to rein in the GSEs. But facts are stubborn things, as Ronald Reagan used to say, and in this instance, the facts support Mr. Bush and offer a harsh judgment on key Democrats. Perhaps that explains why so many in the media haven't told the real story.


All of this and there is MUCH more has been documented over the years. Bush tried to warn dems but dems were too stupid to see what was coming. Frank had a boyfriend at FNMA and Franklin Raines was a black who was drawing a tremendous salary. Bush tried. Dems Failed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

SO, what do you Democrats think about this? You have blamed George Bush for YEARS… did you KNOW that the Democrats were involved, right up to their EARS?

 

The ones here at LF certainly do. How could they not? These facts have been presented to them countless times over the past several years. Those that keep on blaming Bush are just as complicit as Democrat leaders and the left wing media in trying to deceive the masses.. And just as despicable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Mythmaking is in full swing as the Bush administration prepares to leave town. Among the more prominent is the assertion that the housing meltdown resulted from unbridled capitalism under a president opposed to all regulation.

AP

Like most myths, this is entertaining but fictional. In reality, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were among the principal culprits of the housing crisis, and Mr. Bush wanted to rein them in before things got out of hand. Rather than a failure of capitalism, the housing meltdown shows what's likely to happen when government grants special privileges to favored private entities that facilitate bad actors and lousy practices.

 

And how do we know this is true? Because Democrats and Obama by their actions verify it.

 

By agreeing or at least pretending to eliminate Fannie Mae.

 

 

 

More than five years after a mortgage mania led to a global financial crisis rivaling the Great Depression, Washington is finally turning to home-loan finance reform. Early in April the Senate Banking Committee will vote on a bill by Chairman Tim Johnson and ranking Republican Mike Crapo that claims to eliminate Fannie Mae FNMA and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored enterprises that blurred the lines between public and private companies and were a central weakness of the pre-crisis system....

 

Political pressure on Fannie and Freddie and private lenders to reduce underwriting requirements supported those firms' goals of increased business volumes and nominally increased homeownership while generating political gains. The result was millions of borrowers trapped in homes they couldn't afford and the public on the hook through bailouts and expansion of the Federal Reserve's balance sheet.

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304418404579462962749649106?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopOpinion&mg=reno64-wsj

Link to post
Share on other sites

No matter how well documented, no matter what the facts are libs here will never accept the truth. The main reason is oblameo himself. If one was to see that dems caused the crises, starting with Carter, one would have to admit that the policies were bad. Oblameo wants the same policies again. He has proposed a new form of CRA. Another oblameo reason that libs will never admit to is we are still in a crisis. The real unemployment rate is far above the rate oblameo pushes. We are not producing enough new jobs. The economy is growing at an anemic rate. Oblameo policies, particularly oblameocare, are slowing growth and job creation. Taxes are rising slowing growth. Inflation is starting. This takes more money out of consumers pockets. A democratic caused recession is being prolonged by a democratic incompetent. 5+ years of nothing. Dems caused the last recession and oblameo will be justly blamed for the next one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The republicans had the house and senate in 2004.did nothing.

2002 had the house and senate did nothing.

Perhaps, but maybe you misse this part,

Bill Clinton who got THAT ball rolling in 2008?... He sued the major banks and WON a Huge settlement ( $2.1 Billion... a lot of money in 1998)... He FORCED the banks to make loans they didn't really want to make, and evidently made assurances to them against any losses (too big to fail)...

Perhaps you think the republican congress and senate of 2002 and 2004 could have spent money to build a time machine to go back to 1998 and stop Clinton. C'mon. The OP sure makes it clear that there is plenty of blame to go around. The hypocrisy of why Democrats of 2014 think it shouldn't stick to Democrats of 1998 as easily as Democrats of 2014 think it should stick to Republicans of 2002 and 2004, is beyond me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...