Exactly, they’d better wake up on this issue and start attacking Democrats.
Could it be that a hallmark of the Bush administration has been the increased number of minority homeowners, due in part to these flimsy loans?
“why isn’t the GOP hammering this?”
....don’t want to be called “racist” for saying that credit is NOT a civil right.
We need to hammer this. To our friends, families, co-workers. Save the original article. Email to everybody in your address book. Make copies and circulate them. We have to be the media. Can’t count on pathetic GOP or MSM. Let’s just do it. This alone should sink the lousy Dems.
Because it is not politically correct to point out that it was a stupid idea to force financial institutions to give loans to people who did not earn them. But then the financial institutions should have just ignored the rules and tightened the credit on these low lifes.
EVERYONE was afraid to offend the poor and the minorities. Including the GOP.
You are exactly right!!! I am so frustrated with this! My frustration, is not so much about the bail out but, the fact that the TRUTH is not being told. Again, the liberals with their social engineering and convoluted ideas will skate.
Because they are knee deep in it, too.
Prior to HERA, the Secretary of HUD was the mission regulator for the GSEs, with oversight authority to ensure that both GSEs complied with the public purposes set forth in their charters. HUD had general regulatory authority for oversight responsibilities, which included establishing housing goals; monitoring and enforcing compliance with housing goals; new program approval; collecting loan-level data from the GSEs on their mortgage purchase activities; making available to the public a database on non-proprietary GSE loan purchase data; and ensuring GSE compliance with fair lending requirements.From here.
Next.....
But by 2004, when HUD next revised the goals, Freddie and Fannie's purchases of subprime-backed securities had risen tenfold. Foreclosure rates also were rising.
That year, President Bush's HUD ratcheted up the main affordable-housing goal over the next four years, from 50 percent to 56 percent. John C. Weicher, then an assistant HUD secretary, said the institutions lagged behind even the private market and "must do more."
Bush increased the percentage of sub prime lending required from Fannie and Freddie "each (Clinton and Bush) trying to lay claim to a record percentage of homeowners" here)
There is no question that the problems were created by HUD. Oh, by the way the HUD Secretaries under Bush? Mel Martinez and Alphonso Jackson. Both Bush cronies.
Maybe this is why Bush is pushing just as hard as the dems in using your and my money to bail out Fannie and Freddie.
Go to this thread and read the links.
When HUD released the next set of goals in 2004, it reported that after Cuomo's previous edict, there had been a sudden spurt of GSE subprime investment, "partly in response to higher affordable-housing goals set by HUD in 2000." Fannie had gone from $1.2 billion in subprime-mortgage and securities purchases in 2000 to $9.2 billion in 2001 and $15 billion in 2002. Freddie's numbers were murkier, but clearly also on the rise. In 2003 alone, the two bought $81 billion in subprime securities—which also count against the goals.
That was during Martinez's tenure.
Martinez's successor, Alphonso Jackson, ended up being just as scandalous by receiving sub rate loans from Countrywide.
The whole department appears to be incestuous. Also, note that Martinez and Jackson are both minorities. Did that play a role in their relaxing the loan requirements for Fannie and Freddie? They were obviously put there to appease the minority factions of the U.S.
The whole HUD is corrupt, in my opinion. It's intent has been corrupted by years of abuse and lack of oversight.
I realize a lot of people are trying to deflect blame from Bush but a lot of this stuff happened on his watch under Martinez and Jackson. While I don't expect Bush to be able to monitor every facet of the U.S. govt., he kept putting cronies in charge. They either abused their standing with him or he was too naive to see what they were doing.
Because even conservatives don't want to believe it.
They'd rather believe it's the "rich, evil CEO's" and corporations who are at fault.
I think they are behind the scenes. I heard a Senator from Virginia, DeMint (not sure how to spell it), on the John Gambling radio show this morning. That guy is VERY IMPRESSIVE. There are still some fighters out there who are not going to let the rats pin this on the Republicans.
“why isn’t the GOP hammering this?”
Because, yet again, they are being cowered by an obviously Democrat-leaning press.
To even MENTION that Obama’s “Advisors” and prominent black Democrats are a$$-deep in this would be RACIST, doncha know....
Repubs are still hammering on the “DRILL NOW” theme, but have you heard that in the press lately? NO...
Let's say they did and hypothetically I was Barack Obama. I might say "John McCain wants to blame this crisis on poor black folk, people who have nothing and just wanted to live the american dream! Those people were lined up and exploited by the bankers who then took their homes and now are asking for billions in bailouts to make sure they get to keep their mansions! And McCain blames the black guy?"
The template is, if McCain points to increases in unqualified loans, he's a racist. Ridiculous but do you honestly think Obama and the press won't pounce on that line of thought?
Now, why he won't point to his efforts in 2005 to reign in Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae (which were stymied by dems) I don't know. It would go a long way to making him look prescient while making dems look like partison hacks looking to line their pockets. But I guess he must want to retain collegial relations with his friends in the Senate so he won't blame them for anything. Nothing else makes sense.