Posted on 12/27/2008 2:20:52 PM PST by fiscon1
4 later
Whatever...
Mantra? Mantra? Can anyone inform me how to access the State of the Union addresses for the last fifty years?
You want someone to blame?
Jimmy Carter. CRA was his baby, passed under a Democrat congress.
You want someone to take to task?
Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Jim Johnson , Frank Raines, ACORN and La Raza.
You want to have the buck stop somewhere? Reid, Pelosi, Cox, Paulson and Bush.
You want the real triggers? Hedge fund short sellers shorting the dollar, Fannie, Freddie, AIG and Lehman. Follow the money for the trades that started this—at the same time that oil skyrocketed, meaning OPEC was involved.
Anyone seen Soros lately or even know where he and Buffet are?
This place bashes Bush more than Daily Kos.
That’s frankly a lot of nonsense. The CRA was created in 1979 and updated in the mid 1990’s and yet you blame it for something that happened in the early part of 2000’s.
That frankly is beside the point. The piece isn’t about everyone that was responsible for the crisis. That is another piece and a much longer one. This one focuses specifically on Bush’s role in the crisis.
That no one will even acknowledge that he has any responsibility speaks to your own partisanship, not Bush’s lack of responsibility.
So what was he supposed to do???
So has zero found his birth certificate yet?
He was supposed to prosecute mass fraud. That’s what he was supposed to do. There was an obscene amount of FRAUD in mortgages and he did nothing. That’s his responsibility. He looked the other way while all of this fraud went on.
That's my guess.
“Let’s get back on topic. ...”
Yes, let’s do get back to the topic, which is why Freddie and Fannie accepted those loans from the originators. Had they been correctly regulated, the loans they accepted would be of a higher quality and those trying to make such loans would not have done so. Sure, mortgage originators were going after the highest returns which means the highest risk. If they couldn’t get those loans accepted by the Feds playthings they would have never made them.
It was the fact that the Feds would look the other way on who was getting the loans and agree to back such serious risks that drove this all over the cliff, not the fact that there are people who will do whatever you reward them for doing.
That maybe your guess but that is a whole separate issue from looking the other way on fraud. Fannie/Freddie would be the victims of said fraud. They didn’t lie on loan applications.
That you all are trying to insert other issues is a sign of two things 1) your utter lack of knowledge of this crisis and 2) your extreme partisanship in trying to deflect any blame from Bush.
this piece is strictly about Bush’s role in the crisis. It isn’t about Fannie/Freddie, the CRA, or anything else. Nothing else is mentioned and trying to excuse Bush by pointing out other things is ludicrous. Whatever else happened it doesn’t excuse Bush from his role in the crisis.
Because they are corrupt and they took risks with government money. Fannie/Freddie are another issue for another time. This piece was about Bush’s role in the crisis. Trying to defend his behavior in looking the other way while fraud was going on by saying that others had responsibility is ludicrous. It is no excuse that he looked the other way to say that fannie/freddie were just as corrupt.
He did try to do something you twit.. In order preventive measures for stuff like this CONGRESS MUST PASS A LAW!!!!!!! THEN THE PRESIDENT SIGNS THE BILL!!! That how it works here.. Some people here needs a lesson in civics..
My utter lack of knowledge and my extreme partisanship led me to believe that I said that Dubya did NOT turn his back on the fraud, which initiated, in my partisan and ignorant opinion, with Phoney and Fraudie and was exacerbated by legal action being taken and threatened against banks who did not make loans which mere prudence would forbid.
Partisan and ignorant Tom Sowell has maintained persuasively that if "minorities" had been held to higher standards than honkeys whites there would be a lower default rate among minorities. But there was no lower default rate, so it looked like banks were being prudent and fair. When they were required by law to be imprudent is when things went bad.
Now, you've shown you are good at insulting those who do not share your opinion. What other tricks can you do? Please note that "may be" as you used it in the post to which this is a response is two words, at least as ignorant and partisan speakers and writers use the language.You have a nice day day now, bless your heart.
I hate to break it to you but people lied incessantly on their applications about how much money they made, how much money they had in the bank, and where they intended to live, not because of what Fannie/Freddie or anyone else did but rather because it was the only way to get the property they really wanted.
He’s not a twit. You’re ignorant and partisan. Just ask him. He’ll be happy to tell you so.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.