[lonestar67]

Bush’s reforms were exactly about the current crisis. I question whether you even read the descriptions of what W was asking for. And those are brief descriptions of hours of testimony given to Congress on what was necessary to prevent an exact crisis of the nature we are having now.

Not only that, but Barney Frank pitched his usual hissy fit in 2007 saying that there definitely was no crisis and that if anyone said there was they were causing a crisis. This is highly indicative of the same behavior we see on this thread. Denial Denial Denial and then when the crisis comes— just blame it on Bush as if he had no advocacy against the problem.

That is more than ridiculous— its pathological and designed to increase the presence of tyranny in the country. By January of 2007 when Democrats took full control of Congress there was still ample time to reverse course in the lending community and head off the current crisis. The democrats pushed the problem further ahead. The Republican Congress certainly does share some blame but only the BDS crowd of Leftists would insist that Bush get no Credit and total blame. The premise of this thread is 100% Bush blame and no credit for advocating and proposing policies to fix the problem.

Do you own a home calcowgirl? because most mortgages involve government backing such as FHA. You seem to stick to purist absolutism as if we are debating philosophy rather than politics. If all loans lacked government support there would be few people owning homes. The system has worked well for decades and was prevented in places such as Texas where the banking system crashed in the 1980s and the reforms Bush sought had already been implemented. The overwhelming majority of these bad loans took place in Florida and California. Where again, local authorites like the ones in Texas could have implemented lending practices requiring legitimate applicaitons for loans.

It reminds of Katrina where Blanco and Nagin refused to issue emergency orders like those issued in Mississippi because they knew that the deaths of local people would be blamed on Bush. The mortgage crisis had local roots that are quite discernible.

Tarp 1 sucks a lot less than Tarp 2 and again you are unresponsive. This is not philosophy class— this is politics. You have to choose and refusing to choose is part of the problem and promotes Democratic dominance.

That’s not the subject of the thread— well then the Bush advocacy for reforming mortages ought to be germane.

Bush did not invent government backing of mortgages. Home ownership with federal backing is capitalism and conservatism. Home ownership is the acquisition of capital and exposes citizens to the concepts of property taxes which are another severe imposition on our freedoms.

Bush did win an election in 2004. You and your friends had an opportunity to be purists then and failed. McCain also made all of your arguments— bashing Bush to the hilt. Even Palin joined in.

These arguments have not won a single election. That is fair criticism of your arguments.

You are doing much better on rebuttals than sickoflibs but you are still on the wrong side of this debate.

[calcowgirl]

Please don't try to rewrite history. Fannie/Freddie reforms had bipartisan support for a new regulatory agency with powers to raise minimum capital requirements. That may have helped circumvent the crisis. But that wasn't good enough. The greedier amongst them had to push a new slush fund for affordable housing and demand it be included in the bill. Thanks to people like Mike Pence and Richard Shelby (and 30 other conservative congress critters), that was stopped. Unfortunately, those pushing this pork wouldn't go ahead without their new freebie fund.

Shelby Balks At Fund For Housing - Stance Could Complicate Fannie-Freddie Oversight, June 17, 2005; Page D04

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Richard C. Shelby (R-Ala.) has come out against a proposal to divert a portion of the profits of housing giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to pay for affordable housing, a committee spokesman said yesterday, perhaps undermining Democratic support for legislation to strengthen oversight of the two companies.

Committee spokesman Andrew Gray said Shelby is concerned about any program that would "encourage" the companies to take on more risk, as they have done in recent years by expanding their investment portfolios to make more money.

[calcowgirl]

Republican Congress certainly does share some blame but only the BDS crowd of Leftists would insist that Bush get no Credit and total blame.

Well, no one here is insisting "total blame" be placed on Bush.

There is plenty of blame to go around, of which he deserves a healthy portion.

[calcowgirl]

Do you own a home calcowgirl?

Yes.

because most mortgages involve government backing such as FHA. You seem to stick to purist absolutism as if we are debating philosophy rather than politics. If all loans lacked government support there would be few people owning homes.

So you think a proper role of government is to give $$$$ for down payments on homes to low income people?

[calcowgirl]

Tarp 1 sucks a lot less than Tarp 2 and again you are unresponsive. This is not philosophy class— this is politics. You have to choose and refusing to choose is part of the problem and promotes Democratic dominance.

Choose what?

Both programs were crap. Both should have been dismissed.

Markets work -- if you let them!

[calcowgirl]

Bush did win an election in 2004. You and your friends had an opportunity to be purists then and failed.

You're targeting the wrong person. 1) I'm not a purist and 2) I worked hard along with the SBVFT to expose the evil of John Kerry that probably won GWB the election.

I also bit my tongue about GWB for EIGHT LONG YEARS. So, if you don't like a little honest retrospective now, stuff it!